Farve Reinstated; expected to report Monday (1 Viewer)

[Michael Fox Fan]

Seriously?

What part of "I don't want to be a distraction backup if the front office doesn't want me there" do you not understand?

J

I think Favre simply wanted to be handed over the starting job and didn't really want to compete for the job.

This isn't what he's said, though. As recently as today we have several reports saying Favre was more than willing to compete for the starting job.

Then why is he leaving and admitting that Rodgers should be the starter?

Because he was told today that there would be no open competition. Unfortunately, TT and MM won't publicly admit that.

Is that what Favre is saying now? That that is what they told him today? If thats the case, why should he admit that Rodgers should be the starter?

Favre didn't say that at all. It's speculation, backed up by rumors - including one from a GB media guy who I trust. It also makes sense and fits everything that's happened so far.

 

[T Bell]

I have yet to see a good argument against it, yes, including the ridiculous "he didn't want to be a distraction" argument.

I can't help it if you can't see it. J

Joe, it's not that I don't see it, I actually see the opposite for the reasons stated. I hope you'll understand how unsatisfying your one-line response is to my post, which took a good 15 minutes or so to pound out, and you'll forgive me if I ask you to make a better case for Favre's unwillingness to be a distraction in the face of the points I made.

Sorry. I don't really think it's any more complicated than that. I'm sure this will draw a but I think he's got enough self respect and respect for the Green Bay Packers as an institution that he wouldn't force himself into a situation where he was not welcome. Even if he could as you describe. Knowing that it could likely fracture the locker room and damage the team. I'm sorry if that's not "satisfying". I just think you're wrong.J

Is this not precisely what we've seen happen in the last 48 hours?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Seriously?

What part of "I don't want to be a distraction backup if the front office doesn't want me there" do you not understand?

J

I think Favre simply wanted to be handed over the starting job and didn't really want to compete for the job. His ego wouldn't let anyone but him lead the team to a SB.

What makes you think that though? When Mike McCarthy (not Favre) says he believes that Favre was 100% fine with competing for the job, are you saying Mike McCarthy is lying?J

LOL, I think that quote is going to kill some of the Pro-TT guys here Joe. They've been working under the assumption that Favre thinks he's too good to compete to start. So now that the coach says that he's OK with that, they need to find something else to grab on to. Hence all the recent posts about Favre going about this the wrong way, which is true of course.

Favre is the puppet master. Not only does he have Mooch and Mort lying for him. He's using that jedi mind trick and now has Mike McCarthy lying for him now... J

Then why not grab a helmet and take to the practice field and compete for your job then? It's very simple - if McCarthy, et al are lying about an open competition, that will become readily apparent by Favre taking to the practice field. You can't conceal that from reporters forever. That's how you call this bluff if you're Favre, not by pouting and going home.

This is what causes me to doubt Favre's veracity, because his actions don't seem to match up to his words.

Didn't we hear that he wasn't going to be allowed to practice? I thought that was a non-Favre leak to the media, that the Packers wouldn't let him practice. Then we heard that he was going home. One more point and then I'm going to bed:

I know it's easy to be mad at Favre for playing this out through the media, but the truth is that we don't really know what is happening on the other side. I know some TT fans are acting like he is doing all the right/proper things, but without him admitting what he has been saying or doing, or someone catching it on tape, we don't know. He could be a complete egotistical ### to Favre about this whole thing, saying you won't practice, you'll never compete for the QB1, you'll end up on the Vikings over my dead body, etc. We just don't know. So while it's easy to assume that he's doing classy things, you just don't know.

 

[T Bell]

I have not left this thread in the past 13 hours. I even take the laptop into the can with me.

My F5 button is smoking.

 

[Joe Bryant]

If I'm Brett Favre, I call a press conference in the morning. I state clearly what I feel. Assuming Mariucci was being honest, that is that I wanted to play for Green Bay, but it was my opinion that despite what was said publicly, they had decided to go a different direction and I choose not to force myself into a situation like that even if I had the leverage to do so.

I accept the $20 million "marketing" buyout and announce that 100% of it will be donated to the Boys and Girls Club of Green Bay.

Then I move on with my life and enjoy it and 5 years later get the Yellow Jacket and smile.

J

 

[Tau837]

Does Ted Thompson not deserve some benefit of the doubt, given what he's accomplished so far in his tenure?

Yes. The criticism of Ted Thompson reminds me very much of the constant criticism of AJ Smith during his first few years as Chargers GM.If you listened to the fans, everything he did was a huge mistake. Cutting David Boston, drafting-and-trading Eli Manning for three draft picks who have all been Pro Bowlers (instead of passing on Manning to draft Robert Gallery) ... nearly everything he did, he was heavily criticized for, and pretty much every time it has worked out great. People were suggesting that AJ Smith should have been fired immediately after the draft when he selected Antonio Cromartie and Marcus McNeill with the first two picks.

The common theme, though, is that people always criticized AJ Smith for stuff that hadn't played out yet. People thought he should be fired because they predicted that Cromartie wouldn't be a good player ... but they didn't wait to see who was right.

It's the same thing with Ted Thompson now. People might say that Thompson should be fired because they think Aaron Rodgers won't be as good as Brett Favre. But nobody's waiting to see who's right about that.

I would say that if you're going to criticize Thompson for something, you should wait to see how it works out before suggesting he should be fired. If it works out great, the criticism will look silly in hindsight.

I know there were some threads here in the Shark pool skewering Thompson for hiring McCarthy . . . Maybe people should have waited before being so harshly critical.

To say "My opinion differs from Thompson's, so I think he's wrong" is one thing. But to say "My opinion differs from Thompson so I think he should be fired before we wait to find out who was right" seems a bit premature.

I hear you MT but I like the debate AS the decisions are being made. I mean, let's say that Thompson trades Favre to Minnesota. And then Aaron Rodgers goes out and plays terribly. While Favre leads the Vikings to a Super Bowl.

The "I told you so" posters are kind of lame after the fact. I'd rather hear a guy take a strong stand now, before the game is played. You know what I mean?

Obviously, that means we don't truly know who is right or wrong yet. Rodgers could be the MVP this year. But it's fun to debate / discuss what we think of the GMs move and what we'd do if we were the GM. That's pretty much fantasy football.

J

Yes, I agree with all that, and I think discussing these kinds of issues is fun and worthwhile . . . I just think the issue shouldn't be discussed as if it were a foregone conclusion.What should the Packers do here? There are a number of different opinions. Some may look good in hindsight and others may look bad in hindsight. But as of right now, we don't know which are which. We can speculate. I just think a lot of people are a lot more certain about things than they ought to be.

What's the percentage chance that Favre would get more wins (or go further in the playoffs) than Rodgers this year? IMO, anyone who believes it is 99% is delusional, yet a lot of the rhetoric would suggest that 99% is on the low end. IMO, anywhere in the 40%-80% is probably reasonable. Someone who says it's 45% isn't being so ridiculous that he can be dismissed as obviously wrong before the season even starts. Let's see what happens before we pronounce the issue settled.

Says the guy who is putting it at close to 45%...

 

[packersfan]

Maybe Patrick Crayton is right:

It made for a somewhat uncomfortable day for Rodgers, who struggled on the field, throwing three interceptions during an afternoon devoted mostly to practicing plays near the end zone.

Link

 

[Tau837]

What's the percentage chance that Favre would get more wins (or go further in the playoffs) than Rodgers this year? IMO, anyone who believes it is 99% is delusional, yet a lot of the rhetoric would suggest that 99% is on the low end. IMO, anywhere in the 40%-80% is probably reasonable. Someone who says it's 45% isn't being so ridiculous that he can be dismissed as obviously wrong before the season even starts. Let's see what happens before we pronounce the issue settled.

To make sure I'm understanding you, Maurile. You're assuming both players start for Green Bay, right?If one thinks 40% is reasonable, you're saying there are people who think Aaron Rodgers would win more games this year than Favre would if they both had the chance to be the GB QB?J

Joe, MT has posted previously that he thinks it more than 50% likely that Rodgers gives Green Bay a better chance to win this year. Hence, his 45% comment...

 

[Kleck]

Don't you think it's a little late in the game for Favre to make a 'destraction' statement like that now?

Not at all. He's just been there 2 days. According to Mariucci (who may be lying) Favre was surprised at the degree that the front office didn't want him there.J

Do you believe that Favre is just now being surprised by this? This is not some new shocking revelation.

Really? All the TT supporters in here would have you believe the exact opposite - that TT and MM genuinely want Favre back on the team and are bending over backwards to make it work.So evidently a lot of people in here would be surprised enough by this to consider it a shocking revelation.

Based on the events these past few weeks it's seemed pretty clear that if the front office wanted Favre back, he would have been back. Murphy has made his bed with TT, and it wasn't just made 2 days ago.

 

[T Bell]

Seriously?

What part of "I don't want to be a distraction backup if the front office doesn't want me there" do you not understand?

J

I think Favre simply wanted to be handed over the starting job and didn't really want to compete for the job. His ego wouldn't let anyone but him lead the team to a SB.

What makes you think that though? When Mike McCarthy (not Favre) says he believes that Favre was 100% fine with competing for the job, are you saying Mike McCarthy is lying?J

LOL, I think that quote is going to kill some of the Pro-TT guys here Joe. They've been working under the assumption that Favre thinks he's too good to compete to start. So now that the coach says that he's OK with that, they need to find something else to grab on to. Hence all the recent posts about Favre going about this the wrong way, which is true of course.

Favre is the puppet master. Not only does he have Mooch and Mort lying for him. He's using that jedi mind trick and now has Mike McCarthy lying for him now... J

Then why not grab a helmet and take to the practice field and compete for your job then? It's very simple - if McCarthy, et al are lying about an open competition, that will become readily apparent by Favre taking to the practice field. You can't conceal that from reporters forever. That's how you call this bluff if you're Favre, not by pouting and going home.

This is what causes me to doubt Favre's veracity, because his actions don't seem to match up to his words.

Didn't we hear that he wasn't going to be allowed to practice? I thought that was a non-Favre leak to the media, that the Packers wouldn't let him practice. Then we heard that he was going home. One more point and then I'm going to bed:

I know it's easy to be mad at Favre for playing this out through the media, but the truth is that we don't really know what is happening on the other side. I know some TT fans are acting like he is doing all the right/proper things, but without him admitting what he has been saying or doing, or someone catching it on tape, we don't know. He could be a complete egotistical ### to Favre about this whole thing, saying you won't practice, you'll never compete for the QB1, you'll end up on the Vikings over my dead body, etc. We just don't know. So while it's easy to assume that he's doing classy things, you just don't know.

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

 

[3nOut]

Those that are taking "Favre's side" believe you have to take the shot at the Super Bowl when you have it. They believe that you know what Favre brings to the table and you don't have a clue as to what Rodgers brings. You take the sure bet when you can get it. Sure, Rodgers may be the next big thing, but if he's not, you might have blown a golden opportunity.

Thank you FP. It's really not a lot more complicated than that.J

How could they not have a clue what Rodgers brings? He may not have the game experience but they see him every day. I can't say what they see, I'm not there with them. Bt it seems to me that the FO believes that this team may be equally as good no matter who is lining up under center. They could truly believe that Rodgers can also lead them to the SB because their team is that good. Even Favre himself admits this is the most talented team he's been around. It would kill him tosee them go to the SB without him being their QB.If the Bears can make it to the SB with the QBs they've had, why can't Rodgers do it? By the way, since 1985, the Bears and GB both have the same amount of SB appearances and SB wins, and in the last 4 years Favre is 2-6 vs the Bears. Maybe this is whatGBs FO sees.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I have yet to see a good argument against it, yes, including the ridiculous "he didn't want to be a distraction" argument.

I can't help it if you can't see it. J

Joe, it's not that I don't see it, I actually see the opposite for the reasons stated. I hope you'll understand how unsatisfying your one-line response is to my post, which took a good 15 minutes or so to pound out, and you'll forgive me if I ask you to make a better case for Favre's unwillingness to be a distraction in the face of the points I made.

Sorry. I don't really think it's any more complicated than that. I'm sure this will draw a but I think he's got enough self respect and respect for the Green Bay Packers as an institution that he wouldn't force himself into a situation where he was not welcome. Even if he could as you describe. Knowing that it could likely fracture the locker room and damage the team. I'm sorry if that's not "satisfying". I just think you're wrong.J

Is this not precisely what we've seen happen in the last 48 hours?

No. Showing up in Green Bay and meeting with McCarthy and Thompson isn't forcing himself into anything. Forcing himself would be doing what you're advocating and forcing his way into the installation meeting tonight or practice tomorrow.He showed up, met with the front office, got the message he wasn't welcome and is moving on. J

 

[packersfan]

A poll on the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel website:

Who is most to blame for the Brett Favre mess?

GM Ted Thompson (93.3%)

Favre (6.3%)

Coach Mike McCarthy (0.4%)

Total votes: 7,282

 

[3nOut]

Seriously?

What part of "I don't want to be a distraction backup if the front office doesn't want me there" do you not understand?

J

I think Favre simply wanted to be handed over the starting job and didn't really want to compete for the job. His ego wouldn't let anyone but him lead the team to a SB.

What makes you think that though? When Mike McCarthy (not Favre) says he believes that Favre was 100% fine with competing for the job, are you saying Mike McCarthy is lying?J

I believe McCarthy was telling the truth that Favre said he was willing to compete. I just don't believe Favre meant it.

Oh for crissakes. What is this, an Obama thread in the FFA? Now you think you know what Favre meant?

That is my interpretation, my opinion. Do I not have the right?

 

[T Bell]

If I'm Brett Favre, I call a press conference in the morning. I state clearly what I feel. Assuming Mariucci was being honest, that is that I wanted to play for Green Bay, but it was my opinion that despite what was said publicly, they had decided to go a different direction and I choose not to force myself into a situation like that even if I had the leverage to do so.I accept the $20 million "marketing" buyout and announce that 100% of it will be donated to the Boys and Girls Club of Green Bay.Then I move on with my life and enjoy it and 5 years later get the Yellow Jacket and smile.J

That would be about the most graceful resolution you could salvage out of this mess. What if he doesn't do something along these lines though? Does that change your impression as to his motives?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

 

[T Bell]

I have yet to see a good argument against it, yes, including the ridiculous "he didn't want to be a distraction" argument.

I can't help it if you can't see it. J

Joe, it's not that I don't see it, I actually see the opposite for the reasons stated. I hope you'll understand how unsatisfying your one-line response is to my post, which took a good 15 minutes or so to pound out, and you'll forgive me if I ask you to make a better case for Favre's unwillingness to be a distraction in the face of the points I made.

Sorry. I don't really think it's any more complicated than that. I'm sure this will draw a but I think he's got enough self respect and respect for the Green Bay Packers as an institution that he wouldn't force himself into a situation where he was not welcome. Even if he could as you describe. Knowing that it could likely fracture the locker room and damage the team. I'm sorry if that's not "satisfying". I just think you're wrong.J

Is this not precisely what we've seen happen in the last 48 hours?

No. Showing up in Green Bay and meeting with McCarthy and Thompson isn't forcing himself into anything. Forcing himself would be doing what you're advocating and forcing his way into the installation meeting tonight or practice tomorrow.He showed up, met with the front office, got the message he wasn't welcome and is moving on. J

For your explanation to make any sense at all, you'd have to assume that Favre was completely uninformed about the team's intentions for six weeks (since he announced his return) until he was physically at the practice facility. How is that a plausible assumption?

 

[fatness]

Survey respondents were asked this question: "Who do you think is most concerned about the long-term future of the Green Bay Packers - Brett Favre and his supporters, or general manager Ted Thompson and his coach, Mike McCarthy?"According to the survey, 60% said Thompson/McCarthy and 16% said Favre. A total of 24%, nearly one-quarter of those surveyed, either didn't know or declined to answer.

Nobody else but Favre could have done that much damage to Favre's image. Those are pretty amazing numbers. He has tarnished his Subaru.

 

[T Bell]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

I think you're confounding cause and effect here. That was done after he refused to practice and drove away, so that they could save a roster spot. We all know there's no injury.

 

[vitaflo]

Don't you think it's a little late in the game for Favre to make a 'destraction' statement like that now?

Not at all. He's just been there 2 days. According to Mariucci (who may be lying) Favre was surprised at the degree that the front office didn't want him there.J

What Mooch said and what MM said don't necessarily need to be at odds. It's very possible that the Packers staff and MM were put off by Favre's tone about everything (his "mind state") and think he's just too hot over everything to be able to play for the Packers without it causing a huge problem (and perhaps affect his game).Brett on the other hand may feel he's in the right and just wants to play and doesn't get what the big deal is and why he can't just have what he wants (to start for GB).I dunno, the more I hear about this the more I feel like the Packers think Brett's head just isn't in this totally, even though Brett thinks it is. They're dealing with him as outside observers and he's dealing with himself internally. Basically at this point I don't think the Packers trust Brett, and I'm going to assume for Brett the feeling is mutual.

 

[packersfan]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

I think you're confounding cause and effect here. That was done after he refused to practice and drove away, so that they could save a roster spot. We all know there's no injury.

Sounds like there was no open competition for the starting job either.

 

[T Bell]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

I think you're confounding cause and effect here. That was done after he refused to practice and drove away, so that they could save a roster spot. We all know there's no injury.

Sounds like there was no open competition for the starting job either.

So why not expose them as liars by taking to the practice field and letting the media see for themselves that there's not an open competition then?

 

[Tau837]

This is clipped from the article fatness posted.....

"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.

Does anyone else read this as Favre saying he welcomes the open competition, but wont' participate in it? Because that's how I read it.Am I off base?

No, you're not off base. He wants to have it both ways - he wants to say that he's fine with an open competition, but he doesn't want to participate in it, supposedly because it's too much of a distraction to the team. I guess that means he wants to just be handed the starting job in Green Bay . . . that is, to the extent he wants to play in Green Bay at all. And of course he doesn't want to play in Green Bay - he wants to go elsewhere.

This is exactly how I read it.

I don't. It reads to me as though Favre is saying Rodgers deserves to remain the starter right now because he's been in camp and Favre has not. Should there be an open competition for the job however, Favre is confident he will prevail and he believes McCarthy knows this as well. But, Favre thinks the end result of his ultimately supplanting Rodgers a month from now will create "mass confusion" for the players and hurt the team.

Favre is running to the media every chance he gets. I think he is saying some of these things to try to make it seem like he is taking the high road.

Why this isn't more apparent to the people who are all over the team and supporting Favre is beyond me.

Because some of us believe that a 3-time MVP who just led his team to the NFC Championship Game (while playing at a high level) should be reinstated as starter automatically vs. an unproven, injury-prone QB who hasn't started a single game in the NFL, and was coached by the same guy who launched the college careers of multiple failed pro QBs.Does that sum it up?

So because you think he should just be given the job that he quit back...that means you can't see what Favre has been doing over the past few weeks?

I trust Favre to a degree. I don't trust TT. It's been clear for awhile now that he doesn't want Favre to be the starter. And before you talk about long vs short-term decision making: I completely agree with you. TT might simply think that it's in the team's long-term interest to go with Rodgers over Favre. Cool. If that's the case, he should be man enough to say that DIRECTLY to Favre, the coaches, the team, and the fans. Period.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

I think you're confounding cause and effect here. That was done after he refused to practice and drove away, so that they could save a roster spot. We all know there's no injury.

I disagree. This was done in my opinion to handle him if he "grabs a helmet" and tries to show up for practice. He could be forced to rehab and not work with the team. They are not unprepared.J

 

[packersfan]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

I think you're confounding cause and effect here. That was done after he refused to practice and drove away, so that they could save a roster spot. We all know there's no injury.

Sounds like there was no open competition for the starting job either.

So why not expose them as liars by taking to the practice field and letting the media see for themselves that there's not an open competition then?

Maybe he doesn't want to the team itself in that situation. That's not hard to believe. Even if Favre has a complete distrust of Thompson it's hardly a reach to believe that he cares about his former teammates and the Packers' organization as a whole. That actually makes a lot of sense.

 

[packersfan]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

I think you're confounding cause and effect here. That was done after he refused to practice and drove away, so that they could save a roster spot. We all know there's no injury.

I disagree. This was done in my opinion to handle him if he "grabs a helmet" and tries to show up for practice. He could be forced to rehab and not work with the team. They are not unprepared.J

Yup. McCarthy said at his press conference that if Favre had tried to practice he would've spent the day in rehab. The Packers clearly didn't want him on the practice field today and it's safe to say Favre knew that.

 

[3nOut]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

Hurt feelings or bruised ego?

 

[CletiusMaximus]

If I'm Brett Favre, I call a press conference in the morning. I state clearly what I feel. Assuming Mariucci was being honest, that is that I wanted to play for Green Bay, but it was my opinion that despite what was said publicly, they had decided to go a different direction and I choose not to force myself into a situation like that even if I had the leverage to do so.I accept the $20 million "marketing" buyout and announce that 100% of it will be donated to the Boys and Girls Club of Green Bay.Then I move on with my life and enjoy it and 5 years later get the Yellow Jacket and smile.J

I don't doubt that Favre told Mooch that he wants to play in Green Bay. Certainly the Packers chose to go in a different direction and they told Favre that in June, but I believe what McCarthy said today. I believe they would take him back if he were prepared to do and say the right things. McCarthy said his main purpose in the meeting was to determine if Favre is comitted to play in Green Bay and he couldn't get the answer he needs to that question. Those who have followed this closely know that this has consistently been the issue for the Packers since March - that Favre retired and has not comitted to playing in Green Bay.

"The one thing that I was looking for in that conversation was if that he was totally committed. ... His answer frankly was his mindset... that's not where he was. With that we didn't really move ahead. ... He wasn't in the right mindset to play here. ... Here in Green Bay,"

 

[Joe Bryant]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

Hurt feelings or bruised ego?

Lower abdominal strain is what Mike McCarthy said.J

 

[packersfan]

Again, this is a point that Favre-defenders seem to ignore- the CBA prohibits a team locking a player under contract out of the facility or the team's organized activities. You saw this with McNair and the Titans two years ago. The only exceptions are for disciplinary reasons (e.g. TO and Keyshawn), failing a physical, or some other approved reason, however none of those things have been cited by the team. In short, there is absolutely nothing barring Favre from taking to that practice field regardless of what Thompson's or McCarthy's attitude are regarding his return.

Team has taken care of this placing him on the Declared Non Football Injury List.J

Hurt feelings or bruised ego?

Lower abdominal strain is what the team said.J

In layman's terms that means the Packers kicked him in the balls.

 

[3nOut]

I disagree. This was done in my opinion to handle him if he "grabs a helmet" and tries to show up for practice. He could be forced to rehab and not work with the team. They are not unprepared.J

Forced to rehab what? If he's not really injured and they don't allow him to practice, he would have a justifiable law suit against them. The NFLPA would stand behind Favre on this this one.

 

[Raider Nation]

sho nuff = time to kill

Poster  	Posts
sho nuff 	168
Tatum Bell 	76
Joe Bryant 	67
packersfan 	56
Michael Fox 	39
Phurfur 	33
fatness 	29
ookook  	28
ConstruxBoy 	28
Eric Stratton 	25
Just Win Baby 	22
renesauz 	22
tonydead 	20
Jimmy James 	18
Chachi  	17
MSULions 	16 
bubba191919 	15
massraider 	15
CletiusMaximus 	14
Raider Nation 	14

 

[Kleck]

A poll on the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel website:Who is most to blame for the Brett Favre mess?GM Ted Thompson (93.3%)Favre (6.3%)Coach Mike McCarthy (0.4%)Total votes: 7,282

Is that on the front page? Kind of contradicts their "Poll shows favorable view of QB declining in state" article.

 

[packersfan]

A poll on the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel website:Who is most to blame for the Brett Favre mess?GM Ted Thompson (93.3%)Favre (6.3%)Coach Mike McCarthy (0.4%)Total votes: 7,282

Is that on the front page? Kind of contradicts their "Poll shows favorable view of QB declining in state" article.

It was in the sports section on the site.And have I really posted 57 times now in this thread? Wow.

 

[3nOut]

If I'm Brett Favre, I call a press conference in the morning. I state clearly what I feel. Assuming Mariucci was being honest, that is that I wanted to play for Green Bay, but it was my opinion that despite what was said publicly, they had decided to go a different direction and I choose not to force myself into a situation like that even if I had the leverage to do so.I accept the $20 million "marketing" buyout and announce that 100% of it will be donated to the Boys and Girls Club of Green Bay.Then I move on with my life and enjoy it and 5 years later get the Yellow Jacket and smile.J

I don't doubt that Favre told Mooch that he wants to play in Green Bay. Certainly the Packers chose to go in a different direction and they told Favre that in June, but I believe what McCarthy said today. I believe they would take him back if he were prepared to do and say the right things. McCarthy said his main purpose in the meeting was to determine if Favre is comitted to play in Green Bay and he couldn't get the answer he needs to that question. Those who have followed this closely know that this has consistently been the issue for the Packers since March - that Favre retired and has not comitted to playing in Green Bay.

"The one thing that I was looking for in that conversation was if that he was totally committed. ... His answer frankly was his mindset... that's not where he was. With that we didn't really move ahead. ... He wasn't in the right mindset to play here. ... Here in Green Bay,"

Didn't McCharthy say something in today's press conference about asking Favre if he was committed enough to be the last one at the facility each night studying game film as Mcarthy is leaving, but Favre didn't have an answer?

 

[amphibianbri]

I have yet to see a good argument against it, yes, including the ridiculous "he didn't want to be a distraction" argument.

I can't help it if you can't see it. J

Joe, it's not that I don't see it, I actually see the opposite for the reasons stated. I hope you'll understand how unsatisfying your one-line response is to my post, which took a good 15 minutes or so to pound out, and you'll forgive me if I ask you to make a better case for Favre's unwillingness to be a distraction in the face of the points I made.

Sorry. I don't really think it's any more complicated than that. I'm sure this will draw a but I think he's got enough self respect and respect for the Green Bay Packers as an institution that he wouldn't force himself into a situation where he was not welcome. Even if he could as you describe. Knowing that it could likely fracture the locker room and damage the team. I'm sorry if that's not "satisfying". I just think you're wrong.J

I agree.....I think Favre sees the Packers want to move on with Rodgers, but I still think he has an inkling to play, hence maybe Minnesota. As I've said now 3 times, if the Packers want to move on with Rodgers and they think he's the best player for them, so be it, then let Favre go where he wants. If you're afraid of Favre, then he needs to be your QB. This isn't about Favre's competing nature to me, but rather the Packers in this case wanting it all their way (we move on with Rodgers, Favre goes away). I know, then why doesn't Favre just play for the Jets.........umm he's 38 and maybe would like a shot at winning another S.B., not being N.E.'s b*$@# for a year. I think he deserves that.......just wait, the Packers will wait a couple more weeks then decide they are willing to trade Favre to Minn, after it's too late for him to start in the opener.

 

[Penguin]

In layman's terms that means the Packers kicked him in the balls.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I disagree. This was done in my opinion to handle him if he "grabs a helmet" and tries to show up for practice. He could be forced to rehab and not work with the team. They are not unprepared.J

Forced to rehab what? If he's not really injured and they don't allow him to practice, he would have a justifiable law suit against them. The NFLPA would stand behind Favre on this this one.

I dunno about a lawsuit. I'm just telling you what they did and why I think they did it.J

 

[vitaflo]

Looks like the Tampa deal for Favre will probably go through:

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/...favre-deal.aspx

The most important part:

"His wife, Deanna, also gave her approval for a trade to Tampa Bay."

Yup, definitely a done deal.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

If I'm Brett Favre, I call a press conference in the morning. I state clearly what I feel. Assuming Mariucci was being honest, that is that I wanted to play for Green Bay, but it was my opinion that despite what was said publicly, they had decided to go a different direction and I choose not to force myself into a situation like that even if I had the leverage to do so.I accept the $20 million "marketing" buyout and announce that 100% of it will be donated to the Boys and Girls Club of Green Bay.Then I move on with my life and enjoy it and 5 years later get the Yellow Jacket and smile.J

I don't doubt that Favre told Mooch that he wants to play in Green Bay. Certainly the Packers chose to go in a different direction and they told Favre that in June, but I believe what McCarthy said today. I believe they would take him back if he were prepared to do and say the right things. McCarthy said his main purpose in the meeting was to determine if Favre is comitted to play in Green Bay and he couldn't get the answer he needs to that question. Those who have followed this closely know that this has consistently been the issue for the Packers since March - that Favre retired and has not comitted to playing in Green Bay.

"The one thing that I was looking for in that conversation was if that he was totally committed. ... His answer frankly was his mindset... that's not where he was. With that we didn't really move ahead. ... He wasn't in the right mindset to play here. ... Here in Green Bay,"

Didn't McCharthy say something in today's press conference about asking Favre if he was committed enough to be the last one at the facility each night studying game film as Mcarthy is leaving, but Favre didn't have an answer?

he made a reference to asking Favre if he would be in the film room on Thursday nights - a reference to the fact that Favre worked unusually hard last season in the film room and a great deal of his success was attributed to that.I really think McCarthy's comments are worth reading for those that want to hear the Packers' side of the story. He's not a PR guy. I think he's an honest guy and I was impressed with his delivery today:

Why was Brett Favre not at practice?) Brett and I, just to give you a summary of what has gone on since yesterday, Brett and I started to meet last night at 6:00 p.m. We met extensively; I would say approximately four hours. He met also last night with Ted Thompson for about an hour, and then we met again this morning and just the result of his physical was a factor. That had nothing to do really with being at practice, but just to conclude, Brett wanted to go and continue some discussions with Ted Thompson and his family, and that's what went on this afternoon. (Are trade talks imminent?) I'm not going to get into that. Just once again, we had a ton of conversations. Just like I stood here after the Family Night scrimmage, my whole purpose of talking with Brett when he was here, we had obviously a very long conversation. I thought it was an extremely healthy conversation. I would probably classify it as a conversation that everything you wanted to say, everything you wanted to ask went on in that conversation. I thought it was a conversation that was brutally honest. We agreed to disagree. We stood on opposite sides of the fence on a number of issues, and I respect the way he feels, but the one thing that I was looking for out of that conversation was he ready and committed to play football for the Green Bay Packers? And his answer frankly throughout the conversation was his mindset, based on the things that happened throughout this whole course, that's not where he was. So with that, we didn't really move ahead. We talked about all of the different options; I'm not going to get into that. I'm not going to get into the personal part of our conversation, but the essence of the whole thing was I had a list of questions for him to answer those questions. I had questions that I felt were important for him to answer. I had questions for him from the locker room, from his teammates, and he did a great job. I thought it was a very respectful conversation. The feedback was back and forth. But once again, his feeling was, I don't want to speak for him, but based on where he is, the path that it took to get to this part, he wasn't in the right mindset to play here. (Has Brett played his last game as a Green Bay Packer?) There has been no decision made, but that's where we concluded in our conversation, that basically he was not in the right mindset to play here because of all of the things that went on. That's where we left it and I went to practice. Now, we talked about speaking again tonight. That's where I am at this point. (When you say not in the right mindset, does he have animosity toward the franchise?) I'm not going to speak for him. Those are the words that were used when we concluded. Once again, I thought it was a very healthy conversation. Frankly, for two people to sit and talk for six hours obviously was productive. There are plenty of positive things that come out that conversation and there are probably plenty of negative statements that were in that conversation. Like I said, it was brutally honest. It depends on what story you want to write, but that's really where we concluded about the topic of playing football here. (Did you take that as his final answer, or is it subject to change?) I think that's probably the reason we talked so much. We talked about everything that has happened since this whole process started. Probably not once, but twice we re-hashed all of the different things that went on. We agreed, we disagreed, we disagreed, we agreed, but really it came back to what was best for the football team. I told him flat and straight, just like I talked about here in the Family Night scrimmage, my whole focus was on he was one of 80. He was on our 80-man roster, and for us to move forward as a football team with his role being defined, frankly where is your mind at? From that, we went back and talked about everything that happened. It's very personal for him, and that's where he is. I don't want to speak for Brett. (What did you tell him his role would be?) We didn't get that far, like I just said. The fact was he was not in the proper mindset to move forward to be part of the football team. We talked about competing for the starting quarterback, but we really didn't get much into it because, once again, we talked about all of the things that happened up to this point. (So competing was an option on the table?) That was something that we would have talked about if he would have got to the right mindset. He's a football player, OK? I'm not doing the PR thing anymore. I'm coaching the football team. The football team has moved forward, OK? The train has left the station, whatever analogy you want. He needs to jump on the train and let's go, or if we can't get past all of the things that have happened, I need to keep the train moving, and he respects that. He understands that. (With all of the things that have happened, does he have a right to be upset?) I'll just say this; if you would listen to his explanation of things. I respect his opinion, I respect his feelings. I don't agree with some of the things, but I'm not going to dispute how he feels and how personal it is to him. That's his right. I think the ability to sit there and talk as open and as frank that we did, we were able to accomplish a lot of things, and I felt that we were in a good place when I went to practice. Now what has happened since then, I haven't been brought up to date. I thought it was very constructive. (Did you feel that the meeting turned into discussing all of the events and hashing out feelings?) That's what it turned into. That was not my intent when I started the meeting. My whole intent was, 'was he coming into the locker room to play for the Green Bay Packers, and where is your mind at?' That was the first question I asked him, and we could never get back to that point where he was comfortable. It's very personal for him, and understandably so. I have had a very up-front seat throughout this whole process; he has been right in the middle of it. It's emotional for him, very personal. I don't want to be redundant; I don't want to speak for Brett. I respect the way he feels, but he is in a tough spot. (Given the way he feels, are you better served to move on without him?) Well, given his mindset, why would I let anybody of a negative mindset in our locker room? I don't want to classify him as a negative mindset; it's very personal. I'm talking about what we're trying to accomplish. He is in a place right now that he has to make decisions for himself, so my whole goal with talking with Brett was, are your ready to come back and be the guy Thursday night? That's one I said; 'are you going to that guy Thursday night, when I leave my office, and I walk back by the quarterback room, and you're in there studying film.' That was a very good question for him. He's in a tough spot right now. I don't want to sit up here and keep expressing his feelings. He's in a tough spot. (Did he ever explicitly tell you that he wants to play for Minnesota?) I don't want to get into specifics of other options and things like that. He's emotional. There are a lot of things that were said. Like I said, we can make it look very good or we can make it look very bad, and I think you can do that any time two people talk for the amount of time that we talked about a very sensitive issue. I thought it was very healthy and I thought it was very productive. (Is there any scenario where you would trade him to the Vikings?) I'm not going to discuss trade talks and things like that. (How has this situation and the time it has taken affected your ability to prepare and lead this team?) We had some off time yesterday, so I was able to prepare for it and make sure everything was in place for last night as far as my personal responsibilities. We had an install this morning, the red zone. I thought our coaching staff had our players fully prepared. The offense didn't practice very well today. I thought the defense had a heck of a day. I would say this is part of my job. He's one of my 80 players on the roster. (What changed in your mind that there could be an open competition after you said all along that Aaron Rodgers was the starter?) I don't agree with your question. What I said all along was Aaron Rodgers is the starting quarterback on our football team. He was on our 80-man roster. Until Brett Favre reinstated I was not going to participate in hypotheticals. I said that every single time I stood in front of the media because why would I let hypotheticals in our locker room? I wasn't going to do it, and you guys did a great job. You hit me from every angle, but I wasn't going there. Why should I have those conversations and then have our guys be put through the process of answering those questions? So I told the team once again, the only thing we need to worry about is Brett Favre here, not here, and I think our team did a great job of handling that. Now that he is here, we've had to address some things as a team. (Fans want to know why he isn't the starter for the Green Bay Packers?) That's a great question. I think you need to ask Brett. I'm sure he said it, it's pretty complex as far as the way he feels, the chain of events, the path that we have taken to get here. It's not as simple as number four running out there playing football. He's a great football player. I loved coaching him, loved seeing him play. We talked about all of those things, but it's a situation that is extremely personal for him. The path to get to where we are has done some damage. That's where he is. (We will ask him, but from your standpoint, why isn't he the starter?) My direction has never changed. I have answered the question. I have prepared Aaron Rodgers to be the starting quarterback since he retired. We went through the process, he reinstated. It would be no different than any other player to walk through the door that wants to know how he fits in. He needs to go compete for a position. We couldn't come to the right mindset. I didn't get the answers to the questions that I was looking for to open that competition up, so why would I do that to my football team? That would be poor leadership. It's not a popularity contest. I wasn't going to go there. (Did he feel a sense of entitlement for the starting job?) No, he was great about it. The question of Brett Favre's ability to compete? He was all for competing. He had no problem with any of that. He would have come in and competed for his job and I'm sure it would have been a hell of a fight. But no, he had no problem with that at all. (So he couldn't give you an affirmative answer that he would be that guy in on Thursday nights watching film?) It wasn't that he couldn't do, ... he just felt that he wasn't comfortable going in that direction, for a number of different reasons. As the night progressed, I thought we made a lot of progress, but at the end of the day we slept on it and came back this morning and kind of picked up where we left off. That's just where he is mentally the last I spoke to him. (Any plans for Brett to speak to the media?) We have not talked about when he would speak to the media. That's not a conversation ... unfortunately, we talked for six hours, but we did not talk about you guys. I apologize. (Was part of the problem that there was a lot of he said, she said during this process?) The he-said-she-said thing definitely took a toll on Brett, there's no doubt about it. I told him frankly that, the communication I think, both sides, we agreed on this, we both wish maybe things could have been said a different way, handled different. But this is the spot that he's in. (Is his mindset not right for playing here or playing period?) I would just say here in Green Bay. He wants to play. I told him that through the whole process, I did not think he was going to play this year. Just listening to all the conversation, the number of things that have happened between March all the way to this point, and that was one of the things, I said prove me wrong. Tell me I'm wrong, that you're playing for all the right reasons. I thought he was playing, I thought he was extremely emotional. I thought his decision to play was emotional. He told me that was not the case, and I respect that. I told him over and over again, I would like to be wrong, but I never thought through this whole process that he was going to play this year, and if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. (Can he still change your mind?) I don't think so. I don't think he's in that place. We talked about a lot of things. We talked about a lot of things. We talked about him coaching high school football, we talked about a lot of things. This is something that has been very stressful for him. It's been very stressful for his family. He feels the same way the Green Bay Packers do. He would like to resolve this as soon as possible. (Can it be patched up?) I don't have an answer for you. We'll just continue to communicate and see where the next step takes us. (What do you do with him if he is on the roster but not of the right mindset?) Technically, in his physical, he had a lower abdominal strain. Our plan for practice today was for him to go through rehab, so that was actually his plan for today. But then it went to the business direction, which I like to refer to, because it didn't have to do with practice. That would have been the plan. He would have been day to day for us as far as a practice structure. (Will he be taken off the roster?) I don't have the answer to that. There's just a lot of conversation going on right now. (Was it a specific answer to a specific question that he wasn't able to give you or was it more general?) Just in fairness to Brett, I think a lot of those conversations need to stay personal. They were very direct questions, and he was very direct with his answers. I'm just trying to do what you do. You give me different questions, I'm trying to give you the same answer differently. (Do you get the sense that he is conflicted about his own plan?) I think there's a lot of emotion in what he's going through right now, and rightfully so. It's been a very stressful time for him and his family. He's in a tough spot. There's a personal side to this for everybody, and we have a strong working relationship, and it was hard to see him express some of the things he did, whether I agree with them or not. He's in a tough spot right now. (Did you try to patch things up between Brett and Ted?) Well, we had talked about a number of things. We talked about everything throughout our time last night, and actually, he went down and spent some time with Ted. He spoke to Ted for about an hour, and then he came back, we had Sammy's pizza. Give Sammy's a little plug, about 10 o'clock, and we spoke again for about another hour. My understanding is him and Ted had a very healthy, honest conversation also. (Did you have a lot on your chest that you wanted to get out?) I'll just say this. It was a conversation that I think at the end we both felt very good about it. Because everything I wanted to ask, everything I wanted to say, I had that opportunity. We were brutally honest with one another, and like I said, I think a lot was accomplished. (Did it get heated? Was there yelling?) No. We were fine. We're adults. (How hard has this been on you?) Did Jason Wilde put you up to that one? No, I'm fine. Time commitment is always a challenge. We're in training camp, just like everybody else. Our schedule has been laid out for six months. Anytime you spend six hours doing something you didn't plan on, it's a challenge. But we have a great coaching staff, I think our players have handled it very well. It's been challenging here today, and we'll continue to deal with it as a football team. (What was the plan for the competition?) I don't want to get into that. Aaron Rodgers doesn't need ... Aaron Rodgers has done everything right. I understand the attention he gets and the position he's in, but he's done everything right to this point, so why would I put him through any more than he needs to go through? (What did you think of the atmosphere out at practice today with people chanting for Brett when Aaron was taking snaps?) We don't have to do crowd noise this week. It was like working on the road. It's fine. Once again, I think emotion is good. I prefer positive over not positive, but hey, they care. That's one thing you can always say about our fans. They care. (This has been a big story throughout the NFL. Have you heard from any other coaches?) I've had a lot of private support. So it's been good. It's been great. (Do you know how long is Brett in town?) I do not. (Is the possibility of him playing here this year over?) That's something that we'll continue forward. Once again, I just told you how I left it. I left it with him, I guess it would have been about 12:30, 1 o'clock. I haven't spoken to him since practice. (Did you get any signals from the players in the locker room that they wanted this to be over?) Absolutely. The players want it resolved. And you can talk to Brett about it, he feels bad about it. It's time for them to talk about somebody else, and we talked about it as a football team. We're a good football team, and we have an excellent opportunity here to be a very good football team in 2008. We've had an extraordinary challenge dealing with this situation, a lot can be learned from it, but they definitely want this thing resolved as soon as possible. (What makes you so sure Aaron will get the job done?) You just have to believe in a number of things. Number one, I think he's prepared himself for this opportunity. I think he has the tools, physically, mentally, emotionally. I mean, you talk about what he's been challenged with emotionally of late, this is great (training). Who's had better training to play in the National Football league than Aaron Rodgers, and I think he's handled it well. Is he still a first-year quarterback? He's going to have some bumps in the road, I'm not naïve to that. But once again, we need to focus on playing better defense, playing better special teams, and playing offense the way we need to play to score points, and that will never change. I believe in Aaron because he's very talented, but he has prepared himself for this situation. He's had the opportunity to study behind a legend for three years. I think he's taken full advantage of it. (Did you talk to Aaron today?) I asked if he was having a good day. He said yes. He said are you having a good day. I said yes. He's fine. (Brett is on the roster, but not at camp. Will he be fined?) He was excused from practice today. (If he's not at practice tomorrow, will he be fined?) Ask me tomorrow. I mean, let's go. C'mon, we gotta do better than that. (Is he going to be paid for today? Will he be paid for tomorrow? He was excused. I don't even know if they get paid in training camp. You're asking the wrong guy. (Do you expect him at practice tomorrow?) I'll have a talk with him tonight. Really, we'll see what happens tonight. (This team went to the NFC Championship last year and he was the runner-up for MVP; for some fans this seems like insanity...what's the short answer?) I think insanity is strong. I think it's unusual. There's no doubt about it. I've never been a part of anything like this, or seen anything like this. But I think ... I don't have a short answer for you. (What is the long answer?) We don't have enough time. (Did the Packers do a good enough job of making him feel wanted or welcome?) That's part of the issue with him, quite frankly. Listening to him talk about that, you respect his opinion. Frankly, I told him, I'll take responsibility, because I had a voice in the building. I never thought he truly was going to play. I thought he was emotionally driven for other reasons. He was very convincing last night, and again this morning, that he wants to play. He's thought about all the other possibilities and other options, but that's really kind of what happened there. (If you had told him he would be the starter, would he be here?) Last night? No, I don't. I don't think so. Just based off the way he talked about competing for the job, that was not an issue with him. It was not an issue with Brett. He said hey, I'll go out there and compete. He was very positive about Aaron. He thinks he's doing a really good job. He's been impressed with the way, he's watched him mature. I wasn't here for Aaron's rookie year. But he had no qualms at all about competing for his job. That was not an issue at all. (If he couldn't get past all of that, why is he here, because he was reinstated?) That's part of it. Frankly, I really don't want to speak for Brett. I'm trying to speak from our side of it, as much as possible. I'm sure he'll speak to everybody here at some point. (After talking to him for six hours, do you think he is thinking clearly?) He has a lot going through his head, and I think there's ... there's a big ... I think it's emotional. I think it's emotional, just talking to him. He's in a tough spot. I hate to be redundant here. I wish my vocabulary was a little wider. But he's in a tough spot right now. (You're going to talk to him tonight ... what else is there to say?) You ever talk to Brett Favre? Seriously, he's a dynamic individual. Very endearing. Two hours of conversation is not out of the norm. There's a lot we could talk about. (Are you concerned that fans will paint you and Ted as the guys that drove Brett out of Green Bay?) That's not a good feeling, but I don't view it that way. I can only trust the truth. I've been part of a lot of conversations. I don't feel that's the case.

 

[T Bell]

I disagree. This was done in my opinion to handle him if he "grabs a helmet" and tries to show up for practice. He could be forced to rehab and not work with the team. They are not unprepared.J

Forced to rehab what? If he's not really injured and they don't allow him to practice, he would have a justifiable law suit against them. The NFLPA would stand behind Favre on this this one.

I dunno about a lawsuit. I'm just telling you what they did and why I think they did it.J

An explanation which is noteworthy for assuming the greatest amount of sincerity from Favre, and the least from the team, including a violation of the CBA by falsifying Favre's injury status to keep him off the active roster. It's an undeniable pattern in your posts in this thread, Joe.

 

[Kleck]

Looks like the Tampa deal for Favre will probably go through:

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/...favre-deal.aspx

The most important part:

"His wife, Deanna, also gave her approval for a trade to Tampa Bay."

Yup, definitely a done deal.

Maybe Favre can talk Sapp into a comeback...

 

[Joe Bryant]

I disagree. This was done in my opinion to handle him if he "grabs a helmet" and tries to show up for practice. He could be forced to rehab and not work with the team. They are not unprepared.J

Forced to rehab what? If he's not really injured and they don't allow him to practice, he would have a justifiable law suit against them. The NFLPA would stand behind Favre on this this one.

I dunno about a lawsuit. I'm just telling you what they did and why I think they did it.J

An explanation which is noteworthy for assuming the greatest amount of sincerity from Favre, and the least from the team, including a violation of the CBA by falsifying Favre's injury status to keep him off the active roster. It's an undeniable pattern in your posts in this thread, Joe.

You're really reaching now. Has little to do with Favre. I got all that from Mike McCarthy.J

 

[vitaflo]

I really think McCarthy's comments are worth reading for those that want to hear the Packers' side of the story. He's not a PR guy. I think he's an honest guy and I was impressed with his delivery today:

The full video is also up at Packers.com. It's much better to see him talk about it. You get a better sense of what he's trying to say.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Thanks CM,Cutting through the clutter, it feels to me like these exchanges were the really relevant ones:

(This team went to the NFC Championship last year and he was the runner-up for MVP; for some fans this seems like insanity...what's the short answer?)I think insanity is strong. I think it's unusual. There's no doubt about it. I've never been a part of anything like this, or seen anything like this. But I think ... I don't have a short answer for you.(What is the long answer?)We don't have enough time.(Did the Packers do a good enough job of making him feel wanted or welcome?)That's part of the issue with him, quite frankly. Listening to him talk about that, you respect his opinion. Frankly, I told him, I'll take responsibility, because I had a voice in the building. I never thought he truly was going to play. I thought he was emotionally driven for other reasons. He was very convincing last night, and again this morning, that he wants to play. He's thought about all the other possibilities and other options, but that's really kind of what happened there.

J

 

[vitaflo]

I thought this was the most interesting passage:

(Given the way he feels, are you better served to move on without him?) Well, given his mindset, why would I let anybody of a negative mindset in our locker room?

If I read between the lines in the presser, it seems like Brett is burning bridges, but that the Packers helped put some fuel on it as well.

 

[T Bell]

I disagree. This was done in my opinion to handle him if he "grabs a helmet" and tries to show up for practice. He could be forced to rehab and not work with the team. They are not unprepared.

J

Forced to rehab what? If he's not really injured and they don't allow him to practice, he would have a justifiable law suit against them. The NFLPA would stand behind Favre on this this one.

I dunno about a lawsuit. I'm just telling you what they did and why I think they did it.J

An explanation which is noteworthy for assuming the greatest amount of sincerity from Favre, and the least from the team, including a violation of the CBA by falsifying Favre's injury status to keep him off the active roster. It's an undeniable pattern in your posts in this thread, Joe.

You're really reaching now. Has little to do with Favre. I got all that from Mike McCarthy.J

Where?We agree McCarthy said that he didn't believe Favre was in the right "mindset", and that he wasn't welcome to the team under those circumstances. The injury designation however, was done out of necessity, because they didn't want to burn a roster spot on a guy who wasn't going to practice with them. I fail to see how this is "reaching".

 

[T Bell]

Thanks CM,Cutting through the clutter, it feels to me like these exchanges were the really relevant ones:

(This team went to the NFC Championship last year and he was the runner-up for MVP; for some fans this seems like insanity...what's the short answer?)I think insanity is strong. I think it's unusual. There's no doubt about it. I've never been a part of anything like this, or seen anything like this. But I think ... I don't have a short answer for you.(What is the long answer?)We don't have enough time.(Did the Packers do a good enough job of making him feel wanted or welcome?)That's part of the issue with him, quite frankly. Listening to him talk about that, you respect his opinion. Frankly, I told him, I'll take responsibility, because I had a voice in the building. I never thought he truly was going to play. I thought he was emotionally driven for other reasons. He was very convincing last night, and again this morning, that he wants to play. He's thought about all the other possibilities and other options, but that's really kind of what happened there.

J

I felt like this was the most on point as an explanation as to why things are where they are at the moment:

(What did you tell him his role would be?)We didn't get that far, like I just said. The fact was he was not in the proper mindset to move forward to be part of the football team. We talked about competing for the starting quarterback, but we really didn't get much into it because, once again, we talked about all of the things that happened up to this point.(So competing was an option on the table?)That was something that we would have talked about if he would have got to the right mindset. He's a football player, OK? I'm not doing the PR thing anymore. I'm coaching the football team. The football team has moved forward, OK? The train has left the station, whatever analogy you want. He needs to jump on the train and let's go, or if we can't get past all of the things that have happened, I need to keep the train moving, and he respects that. He understands that.(With all of the things that have happened, does he have a right to be upset?)I'll just say this; if you would listen to his explanation of things. I respect his opinion, I respect his feelings. I don't agree with some of the things, but I'm not going to dispute how he feels and how personal it is to him. That's his right. I think the ability to sit there and talk as open and as frank that we did, we were able to accomplish a lot of things, and I felt that we were in a good place when I went to practice. Now what has happened since then, I haven't been brought up to date. I thought it was very constructive.(Did you feel that the meeting turned into discussing all of the events and hashing out feelings?)That's what it turned into. That was not my intent when I started the meeting. My whole intent was, 'was he coming into the locker room to play for the Green Bay Packers, and where is your mind at?' That was the first question I asked him, and we could never get back to that point where he was comfortable. It's very personal for him, and understandably so. I have had a very up-front seat throughout this whole process; he has been right in the middle of it. It's emotional for him, very personal. I don't want to be redundant; I don't want to speak for Brett. I respect the way he feels, but he is in a tough spot.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I disagree. This was done in my opinion to handle him if he "grabs a helmet" and tries to show up for practice. He could be forced to rehab and not work with the team. They are not unprepared.

J

Forced to rehab what? If he's not really injured and they don't allow him to practice, he would have a justifiable law suit against them. The NFLPA would stand behind Favre on this this one.

I dunno about a lawsuit. I'm just telling you what they did and why I think they did it.J

An explanation which is noteworthy for assuming the greatest amount of sincerity from Favre, and the least from the team, including a violation of the CBA by falsifying Favre's injury status to keep him off the active roster. It's an undeniable pattern in your posts in this thread, Joe.

You're really reaching now. Has little to do with Favre. I got all that from Mike McCarthy.J

Where?We agree McCarthy said that he didn't believe Favre was in the right "mindset", and that he wasn't welcome to the team under those circumstances. The injury designation however, was done out of necessity, because they didn't want to burn a roster spot on a guy who wasn't going to practice with them. I fail to see how this is "reaching".

Reaching in that I'm trying to somehow spin what McCarthy said into a pro Favre thing. J

 

[Raider Nation]

Looks like the Tampa deal for Favre will probably go through:

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/...favre-deal.aspx

Jeff Garcia reacts