Farve Reinstated; expected to report Monday (2 Viewers)

[Keys Myaths]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPNOy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this.

Look at Joe stirring the pot. It's hard enough already to wade through the slap fights in here.

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.J

Joe - Is it your experience selling boats or your extensive knowledge of fantasy football that entitles you to claim you know better than Thompson and McCarthy what is best for the Packers? On what basis can you make the bold and insulting accusation that Packers management will "sell out" and accept an inferior product on the field? I've followed the saga closely, and I do not believe that Favre is prepared to be a valuable team player for the Packers this season.

This is what I was trying to say, without being this insulting about it.

 

[tonydead]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPNOy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this. J

Yet...I would still much rather be a Packer fan than a fan of either of those teams.

I used to be indifferent about the NFC North. Now I have lost all respect for GB and Farve. Bottom of my list.

Is that PacMan in your avatar?

The player formerly known as PacMan. Is that Buckwheat in your avatar?

So a guy celebrating a thug with that avatar is talking about losing respect for a team and a player? Umm...OK.No...its Sho Nuff in my avatar...the Shogun of Harlem.

I'm celebrating a new beginning for a talented football player that has a super chance to go to the superbowl this year. Without any threat from the Green Bay Packers from the looks of things.

 

[zadok]

I promised myself I wouldn't post in this thread, but here goes:

The NFL is a business but it's also a game. I think each of our characters are playing a role and never the twain shall meet.

Favre is not taking this seriously, he likes to have fun. It's just a game he gets to play. Nobody can tell him he can't play this game he is good at. He has always played with abandon, wildly celebrating TDs, joking around, etc. The Packers organization, on the other hand, is taking this deadly seriously. There is no fun in their equation. Running a team is the most serious business and the franchise's long term health is paramount. No one player, not even Favre, can disrupt that.

My $.02...

 

[sho nuff]

Not anymore. If Favre plays for another team this year it will be the end for TT in Green Bay.

Not necessarily.If Favre plays for another team and they flop and fail to do anything...would that vindicate Thompson?Many got on him for his handling of Javon Walker...but so far he appears to be dead on correct about that one.They got on him for letting Rivera go...again, good move.Same with Flannagan...Ahman Green.Only Mike Wahle went on to really do much after he left...well, Sharper too...but he was too pricey that year when they had no money (though, so was Wahle).

The only way TT can be vindicated in this is if Favre flops and Rodgers/Packers have a great season. I'd put the chances of those things happening at under 25%.

IMO...Favre has to win it all for him to be any real success anywhere he goes.If its GB and they don't win it all...it sets the team back in the development of Rodgers...and even Brohm for that matter as he would be limited to reps as the #3 guy.A SB for Green Bay is the only way it is really a success.Its a no win situation for all involved right now barring a SB win by Favre with GB(win for all), Favre with Minny (win for Favre loss for GB and TT), Rodgers with GB (loss for Favre)

It will be all about the fans perception on how Favre does with another team and how Rodgers does. It will not take much to sway the opinion of the fans to support Favre and turn on TT. TT has made his bed in this and he better be prepared for how ugly it will get. I think if Favre goes to another team it will a longshot for TT to survive with his job.

Many have already turned. In that respect...Favre/Bus had the game plan for playing the media to get their side of it out while the Packers decided not to comment on most things.But his attitude now that he does not want a distraction seems dishonest given most of the distraction has come from how he has played this out in the media. And to me, it seems he did that purposefully to try and get his release because he knew before he decided to come back that they had moved on.It has to make one think that his intention was never really to come back to GB. But to get that release and go elsewhere...and if so, it seems based on his dislike for Thompson and that he would even go so far as to get this distraction to tear him down.If he could not play for GB...what would be a better way for him to get back at the guy he feels wronged him...by tearing down his career and team and then wanting to go to a rival to try and beat them on the field too.If all that is true...and as a Favre fan I hope it is not...really makes him look like a vindictive #####.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPNOy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this.

Look at Joe stirring the pot. It's hard enough already to wade through the slap fights in here.

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.J

Joe - Is it your experience selling boats or your extensive knowledge of fantasy football that entitles you to claim you know better than Thompson and McCarthy what is best for the Packers? On what basis can you make the bold and insulting accusation that Packers management will "sell out" and accept an inferior product on the field? I've followed the saga closely, and I do not believe that Favre is prepared to be a valuable team player for the Packers this season.

This is what I was trying to say, without being this insulting about it.

Insulting to Joe? I hope not - certainly not my intent.

 

[Keys Myaths]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPN

Oy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this.

Look at Joe stirring the pot. It's hard enough already to wade through the slap fights in here.

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.

Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.

These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.

J

Joe - Is it your experience selling boats or your extensive knowledge of fantasy football that entitles you to claim you know better than Thompson and McCarthy what is best for the Packers? On what basis can you make the bold and insulting accusation that Packers management will "sell out" and accept an inferior product on the field? I've followed the saga closely, and I do not believe that Favre is prepared to be a valuable team player for the Packers this season.

This is what I was trying to say, without being this insulting about it.

Insulting to Joe? I hope not - certainly not my intent.

The bolded was fairly insulting.Made me laugh aloud in my office, though.

 

[Joe Bryant]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPNOy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this.

Look at Joe stirring the pot. It's hard enough already to wade through the slap fights in here.

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.J

Joe - Is it your experience selling boats or your extensive knowledge of fantasy football that entitles you to claim you know better than Thompson and McCarthy what is best for the Packers? On what basis can you make the bold and insulting accusation that Packers management will "sell out" and accept an inferior product on the field? I've followed the saga closely, and I do not believe that Favre is prepared to be a valuable team player for the Packers this season.

Hi CM,On the basis that I think Brett Favre gives the Packers a much better chance to win than Aaron Rodgers. Do you disagree with that?And it's mostly the football experience that lets me think this. The Boats didn't have much to do with it. J

 

[FavreCo]

[quote name='Raider Nation' post='8994680' No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.

The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.

Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.

These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.

J

YOU GO, Joe!!!!

 

[CletiusMaximus]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPN

Oy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this.

Look at Joe stirring the pot. It's hard enough already to wade through the slap fights in here.

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.

Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.

These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.

J

Joe - Is it your experience selling boats or your extensive knowledge of fantasy football that entitles you to claim you know better than Thompson and McCarthy what is best for the Packers? On what basis can you make the bold and insulting accusation that Packers management will "sell out" and accept an inferior product on the field? I've followed the saga closely, and I do not believe that Favre is prepared to be a valuable team player for the Packers this season.

This is what I was trying to say, without being this insulting about it.

Insulting to Joe? I hope not - certainly not my intent.

The bolded was fairly insulting.Made me laugh aloud in my office, though.

Happy to lighten the mood in your office today anyway with this tongue in cheek comment. The point is well known I think - we all have day jobs and none of us really knows anything about running a football team. Personally, I think its easy to see the Thompson/McCarthy viewpoint on this one, but my perspective may be skewed. On one thing I have no doubt, and that is Thompson's professionalism and dedication to winning games.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Hi CM,On the basis that I think Brett Favre gives the Packers a much better chance to win than Aaron Rodgers. Do you disagree with that?And it's mostly the football experience that lets me think this. The Boats didn't have much to do with it. J

You're missing the point.You said that a GM that thinks Rodgers is better than Favre ought to resign.Do I think that Rodgers is a better QB than Favre? No. But I'm an IT manager. Ted Thompson and his staff are among the best in the world at identifying football talent.Could they be wrong? Sure. But to say they're absolutely wrong based on our extensive experience eating Cheetos and flipping between the Packers game and the Vikings game while watching MFL stats refresh every 60 seconds is pretty over-the-top arrogant (and wrong), imo.

 

[Joe Bryant]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPNOy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this. J

Yet...I would still much rather be a Packer fan than a fan of either of those teams.

Sure. Most Packer fans are loyal.What I'm saying is if your most hated rivals are thrilled to see you make the moves your making, doesn't that make you If I hated the Packers with a passion (I don't - I like them) and I loved the Bears or I loved the Vikings, I would be absolutely loving the fact they seem to be choosing Rodgers over Favre. For one simple reason - because I think they'll be a much worse team with Rodgers at the helm than they will be if Favre is under center.J

 

[msommer]

So is the guy reporting or what?

 

[T Bell]

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."

No QB battle. Per ESPN

Oy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this.

Look at Joe stirring the pot. It's hard enough already to wade through the slap fights in here.

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.

Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.

These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.

J

Joe - Is it your experience selling boats or your extensive knowledge of fantasy football that entitles you to claim you know better than Thompson and McCarthy what is best for the Packers? On what basis can you make the bold and insulting accusation that Packers management will "sell out" and accept an inferior product on the field? I've followed the saga closely, and I do not believe that Favre is prepared to be a valuable team player for the Packers this season.

This is what I was trying to say, without being this insulting about it.

Insulting to Joe? I hope not - certainly not my intent.

The bolded was fairly insulting.Made me laugh aloud in my office, though.

Happy to lighten the mood in your office today anyway with this tongue in cheek comment. The point is well known I think - we all have day jobs and none of us really knows anything about running a football team. Personally, I think its easy to see the Thompson/McCarthy viewpoint on this one, but my perspective may be skewed. On one thing I have no doubt, and that is Thompson's professionalism and dedication to winning games.

Y'all are ignorant. You need to bring North in on this. He's a management eggspurt!

 

[Joe Bryant]

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.J

You would risk them losing both Favre and Rodgers after next year for one more shot at glory? I'm not sure there is any question Favre is the better QB for this year, but I'm not sure putting him in there is in the best interest of the team long term.

Hi vita,The long term issue with Rodgers is definitely a concern. I just don't think it's enough reason to sacrifice this season for.J

 

[ScottyFargo]

Yet...I would still much rather be a Packer fan than a fan of either of those teams.

Sure. Most Packer fans are loyal.What I'm saying is if your most hated rivals are thrilled to see you make the moves your making, doesn't that make you If I hated the Packers with a passion (I don't - I like them) and I loved the Bears or I loved the Vikings, I would be absolutely loving the fact they seem to be choosing Rodgers over Favre. For one simple reason - because I think they'll be a much worse team with Rodgers at the helm than they will be if Favre is under center.

As a Viking fan, I will vouch for what you are saying. Favre took them to 13-3 and NFC Championship last year, I am scared that they work out some resolution or come to their senses and have Favre start for them this year.

 

[massraider]

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.J

You would risk them losing both Favre and Rodgers after next year for one more shot at glory? I'm not sure there is any question Favre is the better QB for this year, but I'm not sure putting him in there is in the best interest of the team long term.

Hi vita,The long term issue with Rodgers is definitely a concern. I just don't think it's enough reason to sacrifice this season for.J

Me either. And they also have two years to make Rodgers happy. They can take one more shot, have Rodgers start next year, transition tag him if they want, they have options. i don't think Rodgers feelings or expectations are a reason to not take your shot in 2008.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Hi CM,On the basis that I think Brett Favre gives the Packers a much better chance to win than Aaron Rodgers. Do you disagree with that?And it's mostly the football experience that lets me think this. The Boats didn't have much to do with it. J

You're missing the point.You said that a GM that thinks Rodgers is better than Favre ought to resign.Do I think that Rodgers is a better QB than Favre? No. But I'm an IT manager. Ted Thompson and his staff are among the best in the world at identifying football talent.Could they be wrong? Sure. But to say they're absolutely wrong based on our extensive experience eating Cheetos and flipping between the Packers game and the Vikings game while watching MFL stats refresh every 60 seconds is pretty over-the-top arrogant (and wrong), imo.

Are you saying that there are some people that think that Aaron Rodgers is a better QB than Brett Favre this year? Or that Green Bay will be a better team with Aaron Rodgers as the starter than they would be with Favre as the starter?I'm saying that I don't think even Ted Thompson truly believes that in his heart. I think he's letting personal opinions get in the way of him doing his job - putting the best team on the field.Let's look at it this way (and this is probably worth it's own poll): Let's imagine that after the playoff game last year, Favre goes into the post game press conference and announces that he feels like he's still on top of his game. He feels he can build on the 2007 season and wants to lead the 2008 Packers to another Super Bowl. He says right then he'll be back for 2008 and he plans to be even better than ever.If he'd said that, how much consideration would Aaron Rodger have received for the starting QB job in 2008?J

 

[sho nuff]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPNOy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this. J

Yet...I would still much rather be a Packer fan than a fan of either of those teams.

Sure. Most Packer fans are loyal.What I'm saying is if your most hated rivals are thrilled to see you make the moves your making, doesn't that make you If I hated the Packers with a passion (I don't - I like them) and I loved the Bears or I loved the Vikings, I would be absolutely loving the fact they seem to be choosing Rodgers over Favre. For one simple reason - because I think they'll be a much worse team with Rodgers at the helm than they will be if Favre is under center.J

They might be this year yes.I have conceded that Favre gives them the best chance to win this year.But again, what about next year if Favre is not around...are they better or worse off?

 

[Franknbeans]

someday you will all realize that sho nuff must have the last word

 

[T Bell]

someday you will all realize that sho nuff must have the last word

That's only a rumor.

 

[sho nuff]

Hi CM,On the basis that I think Brett Favre gives the Packers a much better chance to win than Aaron Rodgers. Do you disagree with that?And it's mostly the football experience that lets me think this. The Boats didn't have much to do with it. J

You're missing the point.You said that a GM that thinks Rodgers is better than Favre ought to resign.Do I think that Rodgers is a better QB than Favre? No. But I'm an IT manager. Ted Thompson and his staff are among the best in the world at identifying football talent.Could they be wrong? Sure. But to say they're absolutely wrong based on our extensive experience eating Cheetos and flipping between the Packers game and the Vikings game while watching MFL stats refresh every 60 seconds is pretty over-the-top arrogant (and wrong), imo.

Are you saying that there are some people that think that Aaron Rodgers is a better QB than Brett Favre this year? Or that Green Bay will be a better team with Aaron Rodgers as the starter than they would be with Favre as the starter?I'm saying that I don't think even Ted Thompson truly believes that in his heart. I think he's letting personal opinions get in the way of him doing his job - putting the best team on the field.Let's look at it this way (and this is probably worth it's own poll): Let's imagine that after the playoff game last year, Favre goes into the post game press conference and announces that he feels like he's still on top of his game. He feels he can build on the 2007 season and wants to lead the 2008 Packers to another Super Bowl. He says right then he'll be back for 2008 and he plans to be even better than ever.If he'd said that, how much consideration would Aaron Rodger have received for the starting QB job in 2008?J

And this is where I disagree with you...TT's job is not to just put the best field on the team for this year...but to do what is in the best interest of the team long term as well.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

there is supposed to be a press conference in a couple of minutes - anybody with a link to the live conference?

"Favre told not to practice unless committed to Packers new direction at QB."No QB battle. Per ESPNOy Vey!

wow and I was kinda worried that the packers wised up

Unbelievable. Vikings and Bears fans have to be over this.

Look at Joe stirring the pot. It's hard enough already to wade through the slap fights in here.

No stirring here raider. I've been pretty clear on where I am on this in the email updates.The GM has one job: Put the best team he possibly can on the field.Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.These guys are acting like high school kids. This isn't about ego. This isn't personal. This is business. And it appears to me that the Packers front office is unable to put personal aside and focus on the business. I guess it helps that they'll sell out no matter what kind of product they put on the field. But it's painful to watch these guys screw it up so badly.J

Joe - Is it your experience selling boats or your extensive knowledge of fantasy football that entitles you to claim you know better than Thompson and McCarthy what is best for the Packers? On what basis can you make the bold and insulting accusation that Packers management will "sell out" and accept an inferior product on the field? I've followed the saga closely, and I do not believe that Favre is prepared to be a valuable team player for the Packers this season.

Hi CM,On the basis that I think Brett Favre gives the Packers a much better chance to win than Aaron Rodgers. Do you disagree with that?And it's mostly the football experience that lets me think this. The Boats didn't have much to do with it. J

I don't claim to know whether Favre or Rodgers would be better for the Packers this season, but I know that the people who run the team have made that decision. Maybe they don't like the fact that he was sitting at home since March living the retired life while Rodgers was working with the team every day in Green Bay. You may recall that last season we all made a huge deal out of the fact that Favre had a personal trainer working with him at his home every day in Hattiesburg preparing for the rigors of an NFL season. He's now a year older and doesn't have the benefit of that preparation. I was convinced by his press conference last March and have a hard time believing he is mentally committed to the team this year. Therefore, I don't have a problem believing the coaches are correct on this one. Of course I would love to see #4 run through the tunnel again on Sept. 8 and will be happy if that happens. I certainly would never give a moment's thought to the claim that Thompson has some agenda that includes anything other than winning games this season.I enjoy the message board banter among fans and understand its mostly just filling time between games. However, I believe that we, as fans, can legitimately criticize coaches for some things but not others. In-game clock management errors for example are often obvious coaching mistakes. Sometimes it is clear that a team is undisciplined or unprepared and the coach must answer for that (ala Ray Rhodes in the Packer experience). I don't think that common fans can legitimately criticize management on personel decisions, because those decisions mostly involve factors we are not privy to and the require experience that none of have even a small exposure to. I remember well sitting in Lambeau in the 1993-94 seasons hearing the deafening boos and chants for Ty Detmer every time Favre took the field. I remember Packer fans thinking the loss of Javon Walker was a huge mistake that would cost the team a chance at the superbowl. Therefore, if McCarthy says Rodgers is the starter I am on board with that 100%

 

[burd]

Football is a business and the Pack are the league's only publicly owned franchise.

Set aside your opinion about how much of a prima-donna you may think Favre is. Pretty much everyone agrees that an open competition between Favre and Rogers for the starting QB job would be easily won by Favre.

Now, setting aside your opinion of Favre and the circus that has ensued, from a business standpoint, is it good business or bad business to put the lesser player in the starting lineup? If I were a Packer shareholder, i'd want the best possible product on the field because greater team success means more money for the organization ... and me as a shareholder. The Packers saying that they won't give Brett the chance to win the job back would have me concerned as a shareholder.

 

[Mimo]

Hi CM,

On the basis that I think Brett Favre gives the Packers a much better chance to win than Aaron Rodgers. Do you disagree with that?

And it's mostly the football experience that lets me think this. The Boats didn't have much to do with it.

J

You're missing the point.You said that a GM that thinks Rodgers is better than Favre ought to resign.

Do I think that Rodgers is a better QB than Favre? No. But I'm an IT manager. Ted Thompson and his staff are among the best in the world at identifying football talent.

Could they be wrong? Sure. But to say they're absolutely wrong based on our extensive experience eating Cheetos and flipping between the Packers game and the Vikings game while watching MFL stats refresh every 60 seconds is pretty over-the-top arrogant (and wrong), imo.

Are you saying that there are some people that think that Aaron Rodgers is a better QB than Brett Favre this year? Or that Green Bay will be a better team with Aaron Rodgers as the starter than they would be with Favre as the starter?I'm saying that I don't think even Ted Thompson truly believes that in his heart. I think he's letting personal opinions get in the way of him doing his job - putting the best team on the field.

Let's look at it this way (and this is probably worth it's own poll): Let's imagine that after the playoff game last year, Favre goes into the post game press conference and announces that he feels like he's still on top of his game. He feels he can build on the 2007 season and wants to lead the 2008 Packers to another Super Bowl. He says right then he'll be back for 2008 and he plans to be even better than ever.

If he'd said that, how much consideration would Aaron Rodger have received for the starting QB job in 2008?

J

And this is where I disagree with you...TT's job is not to just put the best field on the team for this year...but to do what is in the best interest of the team long term as well.

TT's job is to put the best team on the field every year. The year he doesn't could cost him his job. Just like any other GM.

 

[sho nuff]

someday you will all realize that sho nuff must have the last word

Not at all.But I will respond to things that I disagree with and if someone responds to me I will address those things.

 

[sho nuff]

Football is a business and the Pack are the league's only publicly owned franchise.Set aside your opinion about how much of a prima-donna you may think Favre is. Pretty much everyone agrees that an open competition between Favre and Rogers for the starting QB job would be easily won by Favre. Now, setting aside your opinion of Favre and the circus that has ensued, from a business standpoint, is it good business or bad business to put the lesser player in the starting lineup? If I were a Packer shareholder, i'd want the best possible product on the field because greater team success means more money for the organization ... and me as a shareholder. The Packers saying that they won't give Brett the chance to win the job back would have me concerned as a shareholder.

The shareholders don't get a cent.

 

[T Bell]

someday you will all realize that sho nuff must have the last word

Not at all.But I will respond to things that I disagree with and if someone responds to me I will address those things.

:irony:

 

[sho nuff]

Hi CM,

On the basis that I think Brett Favre gives the Packers a much better chance to win than Aaron Rodgers. Do you disagree with that?

And it's mostly the football experience that lets me think this. The Boats didn't have much to do with it.

J

You're missing the point.You said that a GM that thinks Rodgers is better than Favre ought to resign.

Do I think that Rodgers is a better QB than Favre? No. But I'm an IT manager. Ted Thompson and his staff are among the best in the world at identifying football talent.

Could they be wrong? Sure. But to say they're absolutely wrong based on our extensive experience eating Cheetos and flipping between the Packers game and the Vikings game while watching MFL stats refresh every 60 seconds is pretty over-the-top arrogant (and wrong), imo.

Are you saying that there are some people that think that Aaron Rodgers is a better QB than Brett Favre this year? Or that Green Bay will be a better team with Aaron Rodgers as the starter than they would be with Favre as the starter?I'm saying that I don't think even Ted Thompson truly believes that in his heart. I think he's letting personal opinions get in the way of him doing his job - putting the best team on the field.

Let's look at it this way (and this is probably worth it's own poll): Let's imagine that after the playoff game last year, Favre goes into the post game press conference and announces that he feels like he's still on top of his game. He feels he can build on the 2007 season and wants to lead the 2008 Packers to another Super Bowl. He says right then he'll be back for 2008 and he plans to be even better than ever.

If he'd said that, how much consideration would Aaron Rodger have received for the starting QB job in 2008?

J

And this is where I disagree with you...TT's job is not to just put the best field on the team for this year...but to do what is in the best interest of the team long term as well.

TT's job is to put the best team on the field every year. The year he doesn't could cost him his job. Just like any other GM.

and yes...that is true...but if he believes the short term gain is not worth the long term loss (as this is what it appears is his thinking)...and it helps him that the guys who determine his employment are in full agreement with his actions.

 

[Tau837]

Let's look at it this way (and this is probably worth it's own poll): Let's imagine that after the playoff game last year, Favre goes into the post game press conference and announces that he feels like he's still on top of his game. He feels he can build on the 2007 season and wants to lead the 2008 Packers to another Super Bowl. He says right then he'll be back for 2008 and he plans to be even better than ever.If he'd said that, how much consideration would Aaron Rodger have received for the starting QB job in 2008?J

IMO Rodgers would have received zero consideration in that scenario. Not that Thompson wouldn't have wanted to move him into the starting role, he just would not have been presented a reasonable opportunity to do so.

 

[twitch]

While I more or less side with Packers management and support their conviction, to a degree, its been their INFLEXIBILITY that's quite possibly going to burn them all. Rodgers has won ZERO games. Favre holds the NFL record for wins. Those 2 players should never compete or even be compared.

What seems to be more than obvious though is that Thompson and McCarthy are dead tired of working, living and existing in the shadow of Brett Favre. And their inability to adjust their plans on the fly pretty much demonstrate that crystally clear. jmho.

Green Bay looks like they could be in trouble this year, as in the kindof trouble that NO found themselves in last year. Just a different team without the same kindof chemistry minus a big time team leader.

 

[sho nuff]

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/...ll-meeting.aspx

They are still meeting.

According to ESPN, which has continually been kept up to date on the situation from the Favre camp, McCarthy told Favre he must be sure that Favre is willing to accept the new direction the team is headed with Aaron Rodgers. According to the Favre camp, Rodgers would be considered the starter.

And people are doubting that Favre is running some PR campaign to get opinion on his side right now?The team is releasing little to nothing...and ESPN keeps getting updated from Favre.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Therefore, if McCarthy says Rodgers is the starter I am on board with that 100%

Really? Wow.Good thing for this message board that lots of people have their own opinions and like talking about them.J

 

[CapnJB]

I wish someone would hurry up and figure out a way to blame this on the Madden Curse™ so both sides could be vindicated.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Let's look at it this way (and this is probably worth it's own poll): Let's imagine that after the playoff game last year, Favre goes into the post game press conference and announces that he feels like he's still on top of his game. He feels he can build on the 2007 season and wants to lead the 2008 Packers to another Super Bowl. He says right then he'll be back for 2008 and he plans to be even better than ever.If he'd said that, how much consideration would Aaron Rodger have received for the starting QB job in 2008?J

IMO Rodgers would have received zero consideration in that scenario. Not that Thompson wouldn't have wanted to move him into the starting role, he just would not have been presented a reasonable opportunity to do so.

Exactly.And take it further - the Brett Favre that hypothetically said that last year isn't any differnet as far as what he can do for the team than the real Brett Favre of today. Boiling it down, the team is letting what he said and did back then change their opinion of what he can do for the team. When in reality, what he can do for the team isn't any different.I contend that if you wanted him as your QB last winter, why wouldn't you want him as your QB in August?J

 

[billymays]

April 9 2008

sho nuff"People will continue to write about him and talk about him for a while....and as long as they do. Idiots on message boards will keep calling Favre a drama queen for doing nothing but mow his lawn and agree to an interview with an old friend who writes for a small newspaper."



things can really change in 4 months huh sho?

your little finger tips must be blistered....can you even see the letters on the keyboard anymore or are they all just kinda shmeared and melted together.

 

[twitch]

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/...ll-meeting.aspx

They are still meeting.

According to ESPN, which has continually been kept up to date on the situation from the Favre camp, McCarthy told Favre he must be sure that Favre is willing to accept the new direction the team is headed with Aaron Rodgers. According to the Favre camp, Rodgers would be considered the starter.

And people are doubting that Favre is running some PR campaign to get opinion on his side right now?The team is releasing little to nothing...and ESPN keeps getting updated from Favre.

I dont think he's necessarily worried about people siding with him. He's no idiot. He understands that's pretty much a given. He's trying to maintain adequate pressure to force Green Bay's hand. Green Bay will sit and do pretty much nothing given the choice. Favre is looking to play football and obviously Green Bay no longer wants him. Any of us would do the exact same thing.

 

[Fedor Emelianenko]

April 9 2008

sho nuff"People will continue to write about him and talk about him for a while....and as long as they do. Idiots on message boards will keep calling Favre a drama queen for doing nothing but mow his lawn and agree to an interview with an old friend who writes for a small newspaper."



things can really change in 4 months huh sho?

your little finger tips must be blistered....can you even see the letters on the keyboard anymore or are they all just kinda shmeared and melted together.

This only turns out well if you are a viking fan.

 

[fatness]

Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.

If the GM and the team's coaches are in relative agreement about it, I don't think you're right. And that may be the case here. Really, with the unending media and public pressure on them, if there were dissenting voices within the Packers' staff they'd be getting heard in internal meetings by now, and anonymously in the press. I have a great deal of trouble picturing this as one renegade GM, out to enforce some kind of personal vengeance, against the will the of rest of the team's staff. With less public scrutiny (unless you happened to be a Redskin fan), the Redskins buried Lavar Arrington on the bench. And as I remember it there were voices at that time within the organization leaking the internal opinion that it was being done out of a personal gripe against Arrington held by someone within the organization. The Favre situation has 10 times the scrutiny that the Arrington situation had, and there's 10 times the reasons for people inside the Packer organization to feed news anonymously to the press concerning any personal vendetta. Yet we've heard none. That may well be because the staff is fairly united in their opinion that it's better for the team for Rogers to start. If that's the case, why would fans know better than the staff?

 

[Tau837]

TT's job is to put the best team on the field every year. The year he doesn't could cost him his job. Just like any other GM.

 

[sho nuff]

April 9 2008

sho nuff"People will continue to write about him and talk about him for a while....and as long as they do. Idiots on message boards will keep calling Favre a drama queen for doing nothing but mow his lawn and agree to an interview with an old friend who writes for a small newspaper."



things can really change in 4 months huh sho?

your little finger tips must be blistered....can you even see the letters on the keyboard anymore or are they all just kinda shmeared and melted together.

Things do change...its not longer about him just doing one small interview now is it?But thanks for being yet another to bring nothing to the table other than attempted insults.

 

[Tau837]

someday you will all realize that sho nuff must have the last word

Not at all.But I will respond to things that I disagree with and if someone responds to me I will address those things.

:irony:

 

[Joe Bryant]

Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.

If the GM and the team's coaches are in relative agreement about it, I don't think you're right. And that may be the case here. Really, with the unending media and public pressure on them, if there were dissenting voices within the Packers' staff they'd be getting heard in internal meetings by now, and anonymously in the press. I have a great deal of trouble picturing this as one renegade GM, out to enforce some kind of personal vengeance, against the will the of rest of the team's staff. With less public scrutiny (unless you happened to be a Redskin fan), the Redskins buried Lavar Arrington on the bench. And as I remember it there were voices at that time within the organization leaking the internal opinion that it was being done out of a personal gripe against Arrington held by someone within the organization. The Favre situation has 10 times the scrutiny that the Arrington situation had, and there's 10 times the reasons for people inside the Packer organization to feed news anonymously to the press concerning any personal vendetta. Yet we've heard none. That may well be because the staff is fairly united in their opinion that it's better for the team for Rogers to start. If that's the case, why would fans know better than the staff?

But I think we are hearing that. Just yesterday, the word was that it had gone from Rodgers as the starter to an open competition.J

 

[sho nuff]

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/...ll-meeting.aspx

They are still meeting.

According to ESPN, which has continually been kept up to date on the situation from the Favre camp, McCarthy told Favre he must be sure that Favre is willing to accept the new direction the team is headed with Aaron Rodgers. According to the Favre camp, Rodgers would be considered the starter.

And people are doubting that Favre is running some PR campaign to get opinion on his side right now?The team is releasing little to nothing...and ESPN keeps getting updated from Favre.

I dont think he's necessarily worried about people siding with him. He's no idiot. He understands that's pretty much a given. He's trying to maintain adequate pressure to force Green Bay's hand. Green Bay will sit and do pretty much nothing given the choice. Favre is looking to play football and obviously Green Bay no longer wants him. Any of us would do the exact same thing.

The thing is...IMO...much of his PR did not start until it was clear that people were siding against him in the beginning. And what he is doing to maintain this pressure is going against his claim that he does not want this to be a distraction. The pressure he is causing seems to come directly from that distraction.

Im not saying that people would not do the same thing.

Not sure...I think I would have done alot of things differently than both Favre and Thompson.

First by keeping all of it out of the media to start with and doing what Favre and McCarthy have been doing last night and this morning...actually sitting down and talking rather than the back and forth through Schefter, Werder, Nix, and Mortenson.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

Let's look at it this way (and this is probably worth it's own poll): Let's imagine that after the playoff game last year, Favre goes into the post game press conference and announces that he feels like he's still on top of his game. He feels he can build on the 2007 season and wants to lead the 2008 Packers to another Super Bowl. He says right then he'll be back for 2008 and he plans to be even better than ever.If he'd said that, how much consideration would Aaron Rodger have received for the starting QB job in 2008?J

IMO Rodgers would have received zero consideration in that scenario. Not that Thompson wouldn't have wanted to move him into the starting role, he just would not have been presented a reasonable opportunity to do so.

I contend that if you wanted him as your QB last winter, why wouldn't you want him as your QB in August?J

My opinion from the beginning has been that he's wanted out of Green Bay. He can say what he wants to the media, but I don't buy it. By all accounts, Favre had his chance to change his mind, and McCarthy and Thompson were clear that it was the last time to make the call. This was after his retirement press conference.Knowing this, Favre decided to try to come back again. There's only one logical conclusion one can draw, and that's Favre wants out.Again, you can take him at what he says in the media. But the smells an awful lot like the McNair scenario, and it becomes more clear by the day that Favre wants to play in Minnesota, just as Green Bay suspected.

 

[QUEZILLA]

Looks like Tampa is going to try and Plumer him int retirement.

 

[T Bell]

Let's look at it this way (and this is probably worth it's own poll): Let's imagine that after the playoff game last year, Favre goes into the post game press conference and announces that he feels like he's still on top of his game. He feels he can build on the 2007 season and wants to lead the 2008 Packers to another Super Bowl. He says right then he'll be back for 2008 and he plans to be even better than ever.If he'd said that, how much consideration would Aaron Rodger have received for the starting QB job in 2008?J

IMO Rodgers would have received zero consideration in that scenario. Not that Thompson wouldn't have wanted to move him into the starting role, he just would not have been presented a reasonable opportunity to do so.

Exactly.And take it further - the Brett Favre that hypothetically said that last year isn't any differnet as far as what he can do for the team than the real Brett Favre of today. Boiling it down, the team is letting what he said and did back then change their opinion of what he can do for the team. When in reality, what he can do for the team isn't any different.I contend that if you wanted him as your QB last winter, why wouldn't you want him as your QB in August?J

Do you think that this offseason of indecision affected his conditioning heading into this season? I do. Running some high school stadium steps with Deanna makes for good TV news footage, but I've got my doubts that he prepared the right way this offseason, and I've got to think that that concerns the Packers.

 

[twitch]

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/...ll-meeting.aspx

They are still meeting.

According to ESPN, which has continually been kept up to date on the situation from the Favre camp, McCarthy told Favre he must be sure that Favre is willing to accept the new direction the team is headed with Aaron Rodgers. According to the Favre camp, Rodgers would be considered the starter.

And people are doubting that Favre is running some PR campaign to get opinion on his side right now?The team is releasing little to nothing...and ESPN keeps getting updated from Favre.

I dont think he's necessarily worried about people siding with him. He's no idiot. He understands that's pretty much a given. He's trying to maintain adequate pressure to force Green Bay's hand. Green Bay will sit and do pretty much nothing given the choice. Favre is looking to play football and obviously Green Bay no longer wants him. Any of us would do the exact same thing.

The thing is...IMO...much of his PR did not start until it was clear that people were siding against him in the beginning.And what he is doing to maintain this pressure is going against his claim that he does not want this to be a distraction. The pressure he is causing seems to come directly from that distraction.

Im not saying that people would not do the same thing.

Not sure...I think I would have done alot of things differently than both Favre and Thompson.

First by keeping all of it out of the media to start with and doing what Favre and McCarthy have been doing last night and this morning...actually sitting down and talking rather than the back and forth through Schefter, Werder, Nix, and Mortenson.

Youre obviously alot closer to this topic than Ive been. And I understand how impossibly tough to handle all of this must be. Hang in there, bro.

 

[sho nuff]

Brett Favre has spoken, and he doesn't sound happy.

Speaking to ESPN's Chris Mortensen, Favre said he and the Packers are "at a stalemate."

"Mike and I both agreed last night that me being out there is a distraction and will continue to be a distraction," Favre said in a story that was posted on ESPN.com a few minutes ago. "We all know the reason I'm here is because the commissioner [Roger Goodell] reinstated me so we have a lot of things to figure out. It's simple and complicated, both at the same time."

According to the report, Favre said his request for a trade to another team in the NFC North was shot down.

Favre also confirmed that there's not likely to be an open competition between him and Rodgers for the Packers' starting quarterback job.

"Mike told me, hey, we're a better team with you on it but wanted to know if I have a problem with an open competition," Favre told Mortensen. "I don't have a problem with competing -- you know that, but Aaron should be the starter right now because he's been out here all this time. This is more than about an open competition and I can do that, absolutely, but this is going to be mass confusion and that's not good for this team.

"I'll practice my butt off, if it comes to that, and I think we all know what the end result will be, but this probably isn't going to work. And I truly understand that if I was in Mike's shoes, I'd see it basically the same way he sees it, I'm sure. And I think if he was in my shoes, he'd see it my way. I think we both agree on that.

"They want to know if I'm committed but I want to know if they're 100 percent committed. The problem is that there's been a lot of damage done and I can't forget it. Stuff has been said, stories planted, that just aren't true. Can I get over all that? I doubt it."

Asked by Mortensen what stories have been "planted," Favre alluded to the reports that said he waffled on un-retiring in late March or early April. He said that's "just not the way it went down, at all."

He also expressed anger with the stories that alleged he had a team-issued cell phone that showed the Vikings were tampering with him.

"Again, that was bull on both parts," he said.

"Then," Favre said, "they tried to buy me off to stay retired."

He added, "So they can say they welcome me back but, come on, the way they've treated me tells you the truth. They don't want me back, so let's move on. I don't know where it's headed. We'll see."

It was unclear exactly when Mortensen interviewed Favre, but the story was posted at 11:52 a.m., CDT. Favre's Cadillac Escalade remains parked in the south loading dock at Lambeau Field.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blo...YZCyQogkp7gM%3D

 

[T Bell]

Any GM that thinks that team includes Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre ought to resign.

If the GM and the team's coaches are in relative agreement about it, I don't think you're right. And that may be the case here. Really, with the unending media and public pressure on them, if there were dissenting voices within the Packers' staff they'd be getting heard in internal meetings by now, and anonymously in the press. I have a great deal of trouble picturing this as one renegade GM, out to enforce some kind of personal vengeance, against the will the of rest of the team's staff. With less public scrutiny (unless you happened to be a Redskin fan), the Redskins buried Lavar Arrington on the bench. And as I remember it there were voices at that time within the organization leaking the internal opinion that it was being done out of a personal gripe against Arrington held by someone within the organization.

The Favre situation has 10 times the scrutiny that the Arrington situation had, and there's 10 times the reasons for people inside the Packer organization to feed news anonymously to the press concerning any personal vendetta. Yet we've heard none. That may well be because the staff is fairly united in their opinion that it's better for the team for Rogers to start. If that's the case, why would fans know better than the staff?

But I think we are hearing that. Just yesterday, the word was that it had gone from Rodgers as the starter to an open competition.J

I won't speak for fatness, but I don't think your response addresses the issue he's raised. Yes, that announcement yesterday amounted to a conclusion, but nobody's planting reasons in the media for this conclusion, e.g. "Brett's not in shape" or "Brett's injured", etc. As smear campaigns go, it's not much of one.

 

[fatness]

Green Bay Packers quarterback Brett Favre went into a meeting Tuesday morning acknowledging that he was at a "stalemate" with the team and believed the "best thing for this team is for us to part ways."

Favre clarified reports that he and the Packers have backpedaled on the premise that there would be an open competition with Aaron Rodgers for the starting job. "Mike told me, hey, we're a better team with you on it but wanted to know if I have a problem with an open competition," Favre said. "I don't have a problem with competing -- you know that, but Aaron should be the starter right now because he's been out here all this time. This is more than about an open competition and I can do that, absolutely, but this is going to be mass confusion and that's not good for this team. I'll practice my butt off, if it comes to that, and I think we all know what the end result will be, but this probably isn't going to work. And I truly understand that if I was in Mike's shoes, I'd see it basically the same way he sees it, I'm sure. And I think if he was in my shoes, he'd see it my way. I think we both agree on that.

"They want to know if I'm committed but I want to know if they're 100 percent committed. The problem is that there's been a lot of damage done and I can't forget it. Stuff has been said, stories planted, that just aren't true. Can I get over all that? I doubt it."

Asked what stories have been "planted," Favre alluded to the reports that said he waffled on un-retiring in late March or early April. He said that's "just not the way it went down, at all." He also expressed anger with the stories that alleged he had a team-issued cell phone that showed the Vikings were tampering with him. "Again, that was bull on both parts," he said. "Then," Favre said, "they tried to buy me off to stay retired." He added, "So they can say they welcome me back but, come on, the way they've treated me tells you the truth. They don't want me back, so let's move on. I don't know where it's headed. We'll see."

The Favre version of events, reported on ESPN.