Farve Reinstated; expected to report Monday (2 Viewers)

[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?

(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.

 

[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".

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

All I'm noting is that the trend in your interpretations of events that inevitably has Favre acting on altruistic and genuine (if occasionally misguided) motivations while at the same time attributing underhanded actions and misleading statements to the team. Whether it's conscious or not I don't know, but the pattern is there.

 

[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?

(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.

Ah, ok I'd missed that. That still entitles Favre to rehab at the facility, which he opted not to do. I agree on the motive behind the designation though.

 

[Hoart Petterson]

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

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

Jeff Garcia reacts

Reaction from Gruden

 

[vitaflo]

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

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

Jeff Garcia reacts

Actual reaction from Garcia (though this was several days ago):http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d809913a2

 

[massraider]

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.

Bump to keep this from getting lost.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

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

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

Jeff Garcia reacts

Reaction from Gruden

I would prefer to see Carmella's reaction

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Interesting comments from long-time Packer beat writer Bob McGinn (hated by many, but in my opinion a great writer):

It’s time to go

Packers finally tell Favre that he’s not wanted

Posted: Aug. 5, 2008

Bob McGinn

E-MAIL

Green Bay - Several times over the years, Brett Favre would ponder his future in football and tell people that he would play "until the Packers don't want me anymore."

Underneath all the twists and turns, sources and stories, interviews and indignities, was one salient fact that never changed:

Favre wasn't wanted in Green Bay.

It took Favre almost seven months to figure it out, but figure it out he finally did Tuesday when Mike McCarthy at last gave it to him straight.

Then Favre drove out of Lambeau Field, in all probability never to wear the No. 4 jersey again that was front and center in one of the most amazing reclamation projects in National Football League history.

Parting company with any legendary athlete is next to impossible, but one with apparent usefulness is impossible. The Packers found themselves caught in a public-relations vice, trying to distance themselves from an all-time great who just wouldn't go away.

From a purely football perspective, the organizational shift against Favre began that November night in Dallas, gained steam in the arctic cold of Soldier Field and became a blaze during Favre's pathetic second-half showing against the New York Giants with a Super Bowl there for the taking.

Just about everyone who counted in the football department reached the conclusion that Favre could never win another championship. His dismal playoff record in the past decade couldn't be overlooked. And the Packers concluded that it would be the mother of all mistakes if Aaron Rodgers got away without being properly evaluated as a starter.

Favre had one chance, and one chance only, to salvage his career in Green Bay. He had to commit wholeheartedly for another season by early March.

One could argue that the Packers erred by asking Favre for an answer that early. But having been hung out to dry by Favre too often in the past, they were in no mood for drama. Their days of mollycoddling were over.

The Packers would have taken back Favre as the starter, albeit reluctantly, if he had acted like any other player and not some diva. That is, show up for work in late March, practice until mid-June and be in exceptional condition by July 28.

That's never too much to expect.

Once Favre tearfully retired, the die was cast. The singular comment made by Favre on March 6 that remains etched indelibly was his admission that he really didn't want the ball in the clutch anymore.

After that, the Packers cut the cord, and rightly so. Favre had come across to most as an emotionally spent 38-year-old with nothing left athletically that he cared to give.

Shortly after the draft, Mike McCarthy basically told his players that he was in charge of this team, not Favre, and that it was critical to rally around Rodgers. Then Rodgers began inviting players to his home. To McCarthy, the off-season is absolutely crucial, and with his entire being he anointed Rodgers.

No matter what Favre might have tried after March 6, he couldn't have turned the tide.

When Favre made overtures in late March about a return, the Packers felt compelled to go meet with him even though in reality they had little or no interest.

In late June, when Favre phoned McCarthy to tell him he might play, the Packers probably were dying inside.

And then came the last month, with Favre formally asking for his release, finally submitting his letter for reinstatement and then flying to Green Bay on Sunday night.

The Packers blame themselves for making some communication gaffes along the way, which they did. They gave away their motives by announcing plans far too early to retire Favre's jersey and to send him his locker. Ted Thompson hid behind too many no-comments.

But when the endgame is to remove a legend, there is no smooth way of doing it.

Favre went on to risk his future as a heroic figure in the state for perpetuity by his actions last month. All but calling Thompson a liar. Revealing intimate details of conversations with Thompson and McCarthy. Selling out offensive line coach James Campen after he went out of his way to help his old pal.

During one interview, Favre criticized Thompson for not interviewing his buddy, Steve Mariucci, for the job that went to McCarthy. After the horrendous job that Mariucci did in Detroit, Thompson would have been roasted for even considering Mariucci, let alone hiring him.

Those were just a few examples of Favre operating almost in a delusional state, hearing only what he wanted to hear and acting as if he was larger than the team.

Some would say, in fact some are saying, that the Packers would be nothing and will be nothing without Favre.

Nevertheless, this was the proper time to determine if that's true by going with one of several young men over one old man. McCarthy's expertise is in quarterback play. His future, as well as Thompson's, will hinge on developing the three quarterbacks on the roster. Failing that, they must quickly find another one who can play.

Last winter, the Packers began talks with Favre about giving him at least $20 million over 10 years in exchange for shaking some hands and making a few appearances. How can a $20 million golden parachute be construed as bribery?

It was a creative step by the organization to present Favre with an honorable go-away present, but in the end became just another decision that poisoned Favre's attitude toward the club.

Against this wholly expected backdrop of ugliness, the Packers will try to get something for Favre in trade. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers have been interested all along, but is Favre?

If Tampa Bay stays with Jeff Garcia, the Packers might well follow up on the feeler that they sent out Friday to the Minnesota Vikings.

As for Rodgers, he needs to shape up. After a promising first three days, he had relatively bad practices Friday, Saturday and Monday sandwiched around a subpar scrimmage Sunday.

Yes, it has been an untenable situation for Rodgers. OK, so what? Now it's time for Rodgers to start performing at the level that McCarthy keeps saying that he will. There's little else but McCarthy's track record to vouch for Rodgers at this point.

Speculation that the Packers might make it an open competition between Rodgers and Favre was a farce. The club floated that idea to promote trade value as well as to placate players, fans and coaches in the unlikely event that Favre got on the practice field.

If the job had been opened to Favre, it would have meant just one thing: McCarthy had lost faith in Rodgers after the first week.

The Packers, just like every other team in the NFC North, hope to win by rushing the ball and playing defense this season.

One week after the Giants loss, it was written here that Thompson's off-season agenda contained three major items: what to do about Favre, defensive coordinator Bob Sanders and the zone run game.

Green Bay made its preferred change on the first item, remaining status quo on the other two. Sanders and the run game had better be dynamic because the quarterbacking probably won't be nearly as good as it was in 2007, when an all-time great had a very good year.

The Packers went with the odds saying Favre never would play that well again. Now they need Rodgers to pull his weight for what has the makings almost everywhere else of being another top team.

Send e-mail to bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=780244

 

[Donnybrook]

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

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

Jeff Garcia reacts

From the above link:

Favre is said to be stressed out by the entire situation, including having about 100 fans and media camped out on his doorstep, and is ready for it to be over. His wife, Deanna, also gave her approval for a trade to Tampa Bay, according to multiple sources.

What are the odds on Favre retiring once his rights are own by Tampa? The circumstances are somewhat similar to those of Jake Plummer. I don't know if he wants to play in another teams uniform but he also wants to distance himself from the Green Bay front office. It would be a sad ending to a story book career but at least there would be closure. It just a feeling that I get

 

[Franknbeans]

Are the people defending TT actually Green Bay fans?

I hope that this bitterness doesn't translate poorly into any future who's hottest polls of yours.

what bitterness? I have no dog in this fight.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

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

LOL. Poll in this thread:Favre - 60%TT - 35%Still undecided despite weeks of debate - 3%"Taking the high moral ground" - 2%

 

[bcr8f]

Poll shows support for franchise

By Don Walker

Tuesday, Aug 5 2008, 10:03 PM

Sixty percent of Wisconsin residents think Green Bay Packers general manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy are more concerned about the long-term future of the franchise than Brett Favre is, a statewide poll released Tuesday shows.

At the same time, the survey by the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute shows that favorable feelings among state residents for the future Hall of Famer have dropped dramatically since December. According to the poll, only 47% of those surveyed had a favorable view of Favre, while 34% had an unfavorable view.

That is a startling drop in support for the three-time most valuable player, who is perhaps the Packers' greatest player ever. Last December, as Favre's Packers were readying a playoff run that would take them to the NFC Championship Game, 73% of the people in Wisconsin had a favorable view of him and only 7% had an unfavorable view.

In September 2004, 75% of those surveyed in Wisconsin had a favorable view of Favre and only 9% had an unfavorable view.

 

[renesauz]

I apologize for continuing to ask, but I haven't seen a really good answer to it yet. I agree with most everything above, from he could be old and worse, etc. I really don't think this is him thinking the job should be handed to him though. I think he realizes that GB really does believe in Rodgers and wants to give him a shot. I don't find that to be selfish, primadonnaish, at all. Again I say though, if GB thinks his skills are diminished, that he is not mentally ready, then why is there a fear in letting him play for who he wants? I'm hearing more people blame Favre for this situation, and I do think there's blame to go around. All I'm hearing from GB management is, "Brett, we want to give Aaron his shot. If you want to be the backup, that's ok. If you want to take $25 million and stay home, that's ok. We think you could possibly not be our best option for the future. However, we are fearful enough of our evaluation of the situation and that we could be wrong , that we don't want you playing for anyone who could possibly make us look bad, so we'll trade you to the Jets or the Bucs, but no way will we let you go to Minnesota." I think GB management needs to have enough confidence in their decision and enough confidence to show to Rodgers to say "We can beat Minnesota with Favre with you as our QB Aaron (or at least we think within the next year we can)." If they don't think that, then they have the wrong guy at QB.

Easy answer. Saying that Favre is now simply average, does NOT mean that he's not still a valid NFL starter. They didn't try to say "Brett, you suck." Then you take a team like Minny or Chicago. Teams with below average QB's (I realize some people see TJ as average now, but that's as high as anyone could go). Favre makes those teams significantly better this year, while doing nothing to hurt the development/future plans of those franchises. GB has basicly said they'll let him go, but not to a close rival he will clearly make better.I don't find that decision to be two-faced, ### some imply. I find it to be a reality check.I skipped a couple of pages, so it's probably already been discussed about what Casserly was saying on NFLN. Basicly, that the Pack's coaching staff had probably already adjusted the offense to better fit Rodgers, and that these things have a deadline. Favre tried to come back after a self-imposed GB deadline, beyond the point of no-return.Interesting observations from Mooch also about how Favre seems to be hurt and upset that they didn't welcome him back with open arms. "I didn't feel welcome." Umm...so all this BS leaking to the press and bashing of TT is because he didn't feel welcome when he screwed up their plans AGAIN? Mooch strongly implied that Favre was upset about the idea of having to compete for his job.If that's all it takes to throw BF off mentally, then he shouldn't be in the NFL.

 

[renesauz]

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.

no CB....the problem is that BF, and most of his supporters, can't even concieve of the possibility that he could lose said competition. Now, from a coaching GM standpoint, I would next wonder/ask: "Brett, if you lose the competition and we choose to start Rodgers, what will you do? Wil you back him up and lend your experiance to the coaching staff/SUPPORT US, or will you bolt (and attempt to undermine us in the press again). Regardless of who McCarthy thinks would win, if Brett wasn't willing to accept the consequences of losing the job, then it was NOT in the teams best interest to allow him to compete. It could very well be that BOTH sides would have welcomed an open competition, but couldn't agree on what would happen IF Brett actually lost.WOW...that gos right in line with ALL of McCarthy's comments like "Favre not being in the right mindset to return".Favre is upset because 1. He didn't feel like he was welcomed back with open arms from the SECOND he changed his mind (and why would he be??????)2. He can't accept that ANYBODY in the organization might honestly beleive Rodgers to be a better direction for the team. He is incapable of facing the consequences of losing the starting job in an "open" competition.These things are not stretches.

 

[ookook]

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.

Of course that is just not true. It appears he was told he would not be allowed to practice WITH THE TEAM. So yeah, he could take some practice field, just not the one with Driver, Jennings, Lee, and Grant. Or Jackson, Jones, and backups.If Favre had reported at a time and place he was not instructed to, then he would be able to be sent home.

A player cannot simply opt with whom he will practice.

 

[fatness]

Nice to see that Favre went through a thorough, hard-hitting, probing interview with Mariucci, instead of hiding behind a podium taking questions from reporters with cameras rolling like McCarthy did. That Favre is such a stand-up guy.

 

[ookook]

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.

no CB....the problem is that BF, and most of his supporters, can't even concieve of the possibility that he could lose said competition. Now, from a coaching GM standpoint, I would next wonder/ask: "Brett, if you lose the competition and we choose to start Rodgers, what will you do? Wil you back him up and lend your experiance to the coaching staff/SUPPORT US, or will you bolt (and attempt to undermine us in the press again). Regardless of who McCarthy thinks would win, if Brett wasn't willing to accept the consequences of losing the job, then it was NOT in the teams best interest to allow him to compete. It could very well be that BOTH sides would have welcomed an open competition, but couldn't agree on what would happen IF Brett actually lost.WOW...that gos right in line with ALL of McCarthy's comments like "Favre not being in the right mindset to return".Favre is upset because 1. He didn't feel like he was welcomed back with open arms from the SECOND he changed his mind (and why would he be??????)2. He can't accept that ANYBODY in the organization might honestly beleive Rodgers to be a better direction for the team. He is incapable of facing the consequences of losing the starting job in an "open" competition.These things are not stretches.

All speculation. No evidence that he was to be allowed to compete. Some to the opposite.So far it seems like Favre has largely told the truth. He was willing to compete. Anyone who thinks he was afraid to lose is pretty delusional.It looks like he was never going to be allowed to practice with other Packers. Or compete. When they said "we have moved on" they meant it. And then tried to force him to stay retired.The Packers were the ones afraid of a competition.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Interesting comments from long-time Packer beat writer Bob McGinn (hated by many, but in my opinion a great writer):

It’s time to go

Packers finally tell Favre that he’s not wanted

Posted: Aug. 5, 2008

Bob McGinn

E-MAIL

Green Bay - Several times over the years, Brett Favre would ponder his future in football and tell people that he would play "until the Packers don't want me anymore."

Underneath all the twists and turns, sources and stories, interviews and indignities, was one salient fact that never changed:

Favre wasn't wanted in Green Bay.

It took Favre almost seven months to figure it out, but figure it out he finally did Tuesday when Mike McCarthy at last gave it to him straight.

Then Favre drove out of Lambeau Field, in all probability never to wear the No. 4 jersey again that was front and center in one of the most amazing reclamation projects in National Football League history.

Parting company with any legendary athlete is next to impossible, but one with apparent usefulness is impossible. The Packers found themselves caught in a public-relations vice, trying to distance themselves from an all-time great who just wouldn't go away.

From a purely football perspective, the organizational shift against Favre began that November night in Dallas, gained steam in the arctic cold of Soldier Field and became a blaze during Favre's pathetic second-half showing against the New York Giants with a Super Bowl there for the taking.

Just about everyone who counted in the football department reached the conclusion that Favre could never win another championship. His dismal playoff record in the past decade couldn't be overlooked. And the Packers concluded that it would be the mother of all mistakes if Aaron Rodgers got away without being properly evaluated as a starter.

Favre had one chance, and one chance only, to salvage his career in Green Bay. He had to commit wholeheartedly for another season by early March.

One could argue that the Packers erred by asking Favre for an answer that early. But having been hung out to dry by Favre too often in the past, they were in no mood for drama. Their days of mollycoddling were over.

The Packers would have taken back Favre as the starter, albeit reluctantly, if he had acted like any other player and not some diva. That is, show up for work in late March, practice until mid-June and be in exceptional condition by July 28.

That's never too much to expect.

Once Favre tearfully retired, the die was cast. The singular comment made by Favre on March 6 that remains etched indelibly was his admission that he really didn't want the ball in the clutch anymore.

After that, the Packers cut the cord, and rightly so. Favre had come across to most as an emotionally spent 38-year-old with nothing left athletically that he cared to give.

Shortly after the draft, Mike McCarthy basically told his players that he was in charge of this team, not Favre, and that it was critical to rally around Rodgers. Then Rodgers began inviting players to his home. To McCarthy, the off-season is absolutely crucial, and with his entire being he anointed Rodgers.

No matter what Favre might have tried after March 6, he couldn't have turned the tide.

When Favre made overtures in late March about a return, the Packers felt compelled to go meet with him even though in reality they had little or no interest.

In late June, when Favre phoned McCarthy to tell him he might play, the Packers probably were dying inside.

And then came the last month, with Favre formally asking for his release, finally submitting his letter for reinstatement and then flying to Green Bay on Sunday night.

The Packers blame themselves for making some communication gaffes along the way, which they did. They gave away their motives by announcing plans far too early to retire Favre's jersey and to send him his locker. Ted Thompson hid behind too many no-comments.

But when the endgame is to remove a legend, there is no smooth way of doing it.

Favre went on to risk his future as a heroic figure in the state for perpetuity by his actions last month. All but calling Thompson a liar. Revealing intimate details of conversations with Thompson and McCarthy. Selling out offensive line coach James Campen after he went out of his way to help his old pal.

During one interview, Favre criticized Thompson for not interviewing his buddy, Steve Mariucci, for the job that went to McCarthy. After the horrendous job that Mariucci did in Detroit, Thompson would have been roasted for even considering Mariucci, let alone hiring him.

Those were just a few examples of Favre operating almost in a delusional state, hearing only what he wanted to hear and acting as if he was larger than the team.

Some would say, in fact some are saying, that the Packers would be nothing and will be nothing without Favre.

Nevertheless, this was the proper time to determine if that's true by going with one of several young men over one old man. McCarthy's expertise is in quarterback play. His future, as well as Thompson's, will hinge on developing the three quarterbacks on the roster. Failing that, they must quickly find another one who can play.

Last winter, the Packers began talks with Favre about giving him at least $20 million over 10 years in exchange for shaking some hands and making a few appearances. How can a $20 million golden parachute be construed as bribery?

It was a creative step by the organization to present Favre with an honorable go-away present, but in the end became just another decision that poisoned Favre's attitude toward the club.

Against this wholly expected backdrop of ugliness, the Packers will try to get something for Favre in trade. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers have been interested all along, but is Favre?

If Tampa Bay stays with Jeff Garcia, the Packers might well follow up on the feeler that they sent out Friday to the Minnesota Vikings.

As for Rodgers, he needs to shape up. After a promising first three days, he had relatively bad practices Friday, Saturday and Monday sandwiched around a subpar scrimmage Sunday.

Yes, it has been an untenable situation for Rodgers. OK, so what? Now it's time for Rodgers to start performing at the level that McCarthy keeps saying that he will. There's little else but McCarthy's track record to vouch for Rodgers at this point.

Speculation that the Packers might make it an open competition between Rodgers and Favre was a farce. The club floated that idea to promote trade value as well as to placate players, fans and coaches in the unlikely event that Favre got on the practice field.

If the job had been opened to Favre, it would have meant just one thing: McCarthy had lost faith in Rodgers after the first week.

The Packers, just like every other team in the NFC North, hope to win by rushing the ball and playing defense this season.

One week after the Giants loss, it was written here that Thompson's off-season agenda contained three major items: what to do about Favre, defensive coordinator Bob Sanders and the zone run game.

Green Bay made its preferred change on the first item, remaining status quo on the other two. Sanders and the run game had better be dynamic because the quarterbacking probably won't be nearly as good as it was in 2007, when an all-time great had a very good year.

The Packers went with the odds saying Favre never would play that well again. Now they need Rodgers to pull his weight for what has the makings almost everywhere else of being another top team.

Send e-mail to bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=780244

Great read. Sums it up perfectly. Both sides bear some major responsibility for what has happened. TT wanted to force out Favre. McCarthy and staff didn't think he could win the big one anymore. Favre couldn't decide whether to play or retire initially, then acted like a child w/ a temper tantrum for the past month.Rodgers is the QB now. Time to move on.

 

[ookook]

Interesting comments from long-time Packer beat writer Bob McGinn (hated by many, but in my opinion a great writer):

It’s time to go

Packers finally tell Favre that he’s not wanted

Posted: Aug. 5, 2008

Bob McGinn

E-MAIL

Green Bay - Several times over the years, Brett Favre would ponder his future in football and tell people that he would play "until the Packers don't want me anymore."

Underneath all the twists and turns, sources and stories, interviews and indignities, was one salient fact that never changed:

Favre wasn't wanted in Green Bay.

It took Favre almost seven months to figure it out, but figure it out he finally did Tuesday when Mike McCarthy at last gave it to him straight.

Then Favre drove out of Lambeau Field, in all probability never to wear the No. 4 jersey again that was front and center in one of the most amazing reclamation projects in National Football League history.

Parting company with any legendary athlete is next to impossible, but one with apparent usefulness is impossible. The Packers found themselves caught in a public-relations vice, trying to distance themselves from an all-time great who just wouldn't go away.

From a purely football perspective, the organizational shift against Favre began that November night in Dallas, gained steam in the arctic cold of Soldier Field and became a blaze during Favre's pathetic second-half showing against the New York Giants with a Super Bowl there for the taking.

Just about everyone who counted in the football department reached the conclusion that Favre could never win another championship. His dismal playoff record in the past decade couldn't be overlooked. And the Packers concluded that it would be the mother of all mistakes if Aaron Rodgers got away without being properly evaluated as a starter.

Favre had one chance, and one chance only, to salvage his career in Green Bay. He had to commit wholeheartedly for another season by early March.

One could argue that the Packers erred by asking Favre for an answer that early. But having been hung out to dry by Favre too often in the past, they were in no mood for drama. Their days of mollycoddling were over.

The Packers would have taken back Favre as the starter, albeit reluctantly, if he had acted like any other player and not some diva. That is, show up for work in late March, practice until mid-June and be in exceptional condition by July 28.

That's never too much to expect.

Once Favre tearfully retired, the die was cast. The singular comment made by Favre on March 6 that remains etched indelibly was his admission that he really didn't want the ball in the clutch anymore.

After that, the Packers cut the cord, and rightly so. Favre had come across to most as an emotionally spent 38-year-old with nothing left athletically that he cared to give.

Shortly after the draft, Mike McCarthy basically told his players that he was in charge of this team, not Favre, and that it was critical to rally around Rodgers. Then Rodgers began inviting players to his home. To McCarthy, the off-season is absolutely crucial, and with his entire being he anointed Rodgers.

No matter what Favre might have tried after March 6, he couldn't have turned the tide.

When Favre made overtures in late March about a return, the Packers felt compelled to go meet with him even though in reality they had little or no interest.

In late June, when Favre phoned McCarthy to tell him he might play, the Packers probably were dying inside.

And then came the last month, with Favre formally asking for his release, finally submitting his letter for reinstatement and then flying to Green Bay on Sunday night.

The Packers blame themselves for making some communication gaffes along the way, which they did. They gave away their motives by announcing plans far too early to retire Favre's jersey and to send him his locker. Ted Thompson hid behind too many no-comments.

But when the endgame is to remove a legend, there is no smooth way of doing it.

Favre went on to risk his future as a heroic figure in the state for perpetuity by his actions last month. All but calling Thompson a liar. Revealing intimate details of conversations with Thompson and McCarthy. Selling out offensive line coach James Campen after he went out of his way to help his old pal.

During one interview, Favre criticized Thompson for not interviewing his buddy, Steve Mariucci, for the job that went to McCarthy. After the horrendous job that Mariucci did in Detroit, Thompson would have been roasted for even considering Mariucci, let alone hiring him.

Those were just a few examples of Favre operating almost in a delusional state, hearing only what he wanted to hear and acting as if he was larger than the team.

Some would say, in fact some are saying, that the Packers would be nothing and will be nothing without Favre.

Nevertheless, this was the proper time to determine if that's true by going with one of several young men over one old man. McCarthy's expertise is in quarterback play. His future, as well as Thompson's, will hinge on developing the three quarterbacks on the roster. Failing that, they must quickly find another one who can play.

Last winter, the Packers began talks with Favre about giving him at least $20 million over 10 years in exchange for shaking some hands and making a few appearances. How can a $20 million golden parachute be construed as bribery?

It was a creative step by the organization to present Favre with an honorable go-away present, but in the end became just another decision that poisoned Favre's attitude toward the club.

Against this wholly expected backdrop of ugliness, the Packers will try to get something for Favre in trade. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers have been interested all along, but is Favre?

If Tampa Bay stays with Jeff Garcia, the Packers might well follow up on the feeler that they sent out Friday to the Minnesota Vikings.

As for Rodgers, he needs to shape up. After a promising first three days, he had relatively bad practices Friday, Saturday and Monday sandwiched around a subpar scrimmage Sunday.

Yes, it has been an untenable situation for Rodgers. OK, so what? Now it's time for Rodgers to start performing at the level that McCarthy keeps saying that he will. There's little else but McCarthy's track record to vouch for Rodgers at this point.

Speculation that the Packers might make it an open competition between Rodgers and Favre was a farce. The club floated that idea to promote trade value as well as to placate players, fans and coaches in the unlikely event that Favre got on the practice field.

If the job had been opened to Favre, it would have meant just one thing: McCarthy had lost faith in Rodgers after the first week.

The Packers, just like every other team in the NFC North, hope to win by rushing the ball and playing defense this season.

One week after the Giants loss, it was written here that Thompson's off-season agenda contained three major items: what to do about Favre, defensive coordinator Bob Sanders and the zone run game.

Green Bay made its preferred change on the first item, remaining status quo on the other two. Sanders and the run game had better be dynamic because the quarterbacking probably won't be nearly as good as it was in 2007, when an all-time great had a very good year.

The Packers went with the odds saying Favre never would play that well again. Now they need Rodgers to pull his weight for what has the makings almost everywhere else of being another top team.

Send e-mail to bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=780244

Great read. Sums it up perfectly. Both sides bear some major responsibility for what has happened. TT wanted to force out Favre. McCarthy and staff didn't think he could win the big one anymore. Favre couldn't decide whether to play or retire initially, then acted like a child w/ a temper tantrum for the past month.Rodgers is the QB now. Time to move on.

If by that you mean doing everything he could to PLAY for a team where he might be able to still win games, then okay.But I have seen no tantrum, just someone resenting being treated poorly and slighted. Favre gets especially bent when the FO says things that aren't true. Freaking child.

Count me as a child too.

 

[Todem]

It is crystal clear now that the Packers moved on after his March retirement. So with that if Brett truly wants to play football he will be traded in the next 24-48 hours.

I was wrong in calling out MM. He is just a coach in the middle of this mess trying to prepare his football team. However TT for all the great work he has done rebuidling the talent in Green Bay will be remembered as the guy who closed the door on the PAckers all time most popular player and the current face of the NFL. I will stand by my statement though that if Rodgers flops (and i think he will). Thompson will be run out of town in a New York minute. Rodgers is a stiff. A hig draft pick that will end up being a mistake. Not anything new when it comes to QB busts.

I am calling it now. I am not waiting to watch him play in a real NFL game...I have seen enough with his pre-seasons and that Family night....OMG...brutal.

 

[renesauz]

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.

no CB....the problem is that BF, and most of his supporters, can't even concieve of the possibility that he could lose said competition. Now, from a coaching GM standpoint, I would next wonder/ask: "Brett, if you lose the competition and we choose to start Rodgers, what will you do? Wil you back him up and lend your experiance to the coaching staff/SUPPORT US, or will you bolt (and attempt to undermine us in the press again). Regardless of who McCarthy thinks would win, if Brett wasn't willing to accept the consequences of losing the job, then it was NOT in the teams best interest to allow him to compete. It could very well be that BOTH sides would have welcomed an open competition, but couldn't agree on what would happen IF Brett actually lost.

WOW...that gos right in line with ALL of McCarthy's comments like "Favre not being in the right mindset to return".

Favre is upset because

1. He didn't feel like he was welcomed back with open arms from the SECOND he changed his mind (and why would he be??????)

2. He can't accept that ANYBODY in the organization might honestly beleive Rodgers to be a better direction for the team. He is incapable of facing the consequences of losing the starting job in an "open" competition.

These things are not stretches.

All speculation. No evidence that he was to be allowed to compete. Some to the opposite.

So far it seems like Favre has largely told the truth. He was willing to compete. Anyone who thinks he was afraid to lose is pretty delusional.

It looks like he was never going to be allowed to practice with other Packers. Or compete.

When they said "we have moved on" they meant it. And then tried to force him to stay retired.

The Packers were the ones afraid of a competition.

WOW....Maybe I should more clearly spell out my tone. IT DOESN'T MATTER!Over and over again I've asked "How do you even attempt a fair competition?" with NOBODY giving me an answer beyond "be professional".

Now...we are back to the other question: Do you, BF, or any of the other BF supporters even remotely believe he could lose an open competition?

Do any of you believe he'd sit the bench if he did? (Or will he take off/re-retire bitter and angry, trashing the organization more, and leaving the team without a properly prepared backup QB?)

Most of the bashing of TT has been speculative. "He lied to Brett". WHERE? Brett lied when he said he was retired, whether he meant to or not. The PROVEN lies are all on BF's side.

Where the Packers afraid of a competition? HELL YES THEY WERE!!!! Why? Because millions can't envision BF could lose. It's a public relations nightmare where every possible likely outcome was frought with dangerous possibilities. SO WHAT?!

ETA: What I mean is, the Packers, from everything I can intimate (realizing I could be off) were very reluctant to let Brett compete. MM said Brett wasn't in the right frame of mind to allow it to happen in a healthy way. BF said it wasn't right to Aaron Rodgers. Many of us question how this open comp could have fairly occured anyway.

IE: WE're really beating a dead horse on this subject, because there are legit reasons on all sides to be misleading about it. legit reasons for both sides to NOT want an open comp.....but the fans do.

 

[bcr8f]

All speculation. No evidence that he was to be allowed to compete. Some to the opposite.So far it seems like Favre has largely told the truth. He was willing to compete. Anyone who thinks he was afraid to lose is pretty delusional.It looks like he was never going to be allowed to practice with other Packers. Or compete. When they said "we have moved on" they meant it. And then tried to force him to stay retired.The Packers were the ones afraid of a competition.

You say it's all speculation and then speculate and even make #### up yourself. McCarthy said Favre's mind was not right to play in Green Bay and I believe him. It's pretty obvious he wanted to play in Minnesota so he could seek revenge twice a year. Look back at what he has said.

 

[Sabertooth]

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

Yes, and I think Mike McCarthy might be one of them.

Cool. Do you think it's that Favre's skills have faded or that Rodgers really is the real deal? Or more mental / attitude stuff? Or a mix of all?J

I think McCarthy has stated that he wants to win with defense, special teams, and running the ball. Rodgers might be less apt to throw the killer interception at the critical time like Favre did against New York last season. Rodgers might not wilt in the cold like Favre did against Chicago and New York last season. Rodgers might not throw 30 touchdowns, but he probably won't throw 20 picks either.

 

[H.K.]

Hottest selling T-shirts in Green Bay:

Front: "In Brett We Trust" Back: "With Aaron We Bust"

&

"Better Dead Than Ted"

 

[Anthony Borbely]

If Favre really wanted to do nothing more than compete, he would be in camp right now. It's clear to me he never wanted anything except being released so he could sign with Minnesota. He never had any intention of playing for the Packers from the start. That's my opinion.

 

[H.K.]

Rodgers might be less apt to throw the killer interception at the critical time like Favre did against New York last season. Rodgers might not wilt in the cold like Favre did against Chicago and New York last season. Rodgers might not throw 30 touchdowns, but he probably won't throw 20 picks either.

The Packers need to worry more about Rodgers playing two consecutive weeks before even thinking about what he might do over a full 16 game season. After all, his one TD pass in his three year career represents the sum total of all NFL QB TD passes thrown on the Packer roster. Assuming Rodgers can stay healthy enough to start Week 1, then he'll lead the team in that category for QB's, too. Quite a depth chart they've built there.

 

[T Bell]

It is crystal clear now that the Packers moved on after his March retirement. So with that if Brett truly wants to play football he will be traded in the next 24-48 hours. I was wrong in calling out MM. He is just a coach in the middle of this mess trying to prepare his football team. However TT for all the great work he has done rebuidling the talent in Green Bay will be remembered as the guy who closed the door on the PAckers all time most popular player and the current face of the NFL. I will stand by my statement though that if Rodgers flops (and i think he will). Thompson will be run out of town in a New York minute. Rodgers is a stiff. A hig draft pick that will end up being a mistake. Not anything new when it comes to QB busts.I am calling it now. I am not waiting to watch him play in a real NFL game...I have seen enough with his pre-seasons and that Family night....OMG...brutal.

TT can be redeemed in two ways. 1) Rodgers succeedes.2) Favre continues to play and shows that he's washed up, or at least that he's incapable of winning another championship.People seem to discount the latter, but I think it's a real possibility. Nobody has said Aaron Rodgers is great or is a sure-fire winner, just that it's now time for them to evaluate him. Only the Favre crowd seems to ignore that.

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

and how anyone can support his DEMANDS to be traded to either of the Packers' primary divisional rivals is beyond me as well. He has refused any trade to anyone but Minnesota until now...why? because he's a child is why. It's a delusional, immature, blatantly confrontational demand designed to cause this exact standoff. There is NO WAY they will trade him to Minnesota, and they absolutely shouldn't. He can pull a Montana to the Chiefs or OJ to SF if he wants, but he's demanding Montana to Dallas - which is idiotic. How anyone can support Favre - the guy who's been feeding ESPN throughout it all to try and gain favor in the media - is utterly incomprehensible to me.

Again, I guess it depends on who you believe. Is Mariucci lying when he says that Favre's wants to play first and foremost in Green Bay?J

Then why leave camp?Then why say it just won't work?

Then why say release me?

Then why say he won't compete as he does not think it is right?

If he so wants to play for GB...push it to that...he has pushed so many other things...distraction be damned...why stop short of what he claims to really want?

Favre's behaving like a spoiled princess, and his defenders are out amplifying "her" laments rather than telling him to cut out the whole princess act to begin with. I'm reminded of the famous scene from The Godfather:

Johnny Fontane: Oh, Godfather, I don't know what to do. I don't know what to do.

Don Corleone: [shouts] You can act like a man!

[he slaps Johnny]

Don Corleone: What's the matter with you. Is this how you turned out? A Hollywood finocchio that cries like a woman.

[Don Corleone imitates him sobbing]

Don Corleone: "What can I do?"

[cut to Tom who is laughing]

Don Corleone: "What can I do?" What is that nonsense. Ridiculous.

J

I get a on that, but you avoided answering what I proposed was the mature solution to all of this for Favre, a simple three-step solution:1) announce your return, unequivocally;

2) apply for reinstatement;

3) report to camp.

That's what an adult who just wants to play football does, and it immediately gives him all the leverage as it forces the Packers to fish or cut bait. No drama in the media, just go about your business, and events take care of themselves, with nobody blaming you.

Sometimes the simplest solutions are the best ones. But that's not what Favre did, and it's not what you're advocating, instead preferring to pick and choose certain quotes (tending to be favorable to Favre) and ignoring other (not-so-favorable) ones. It's just telling to me that the Favre supporters don't seem to have much of an explanation for why Favre didn't proceed as I've outlined here, if he "just wanted to return to play football".

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

J

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when I hear arguments like this one. Yeah, his non-distracting approach sure has worked like a charm, eh? What part of "he applied for reinstatement and came to Green Bay anyway" do you not understand?

If he was so concerned about "not being a distraction", why did he:

1) announce publicly his intention to return?

2) leak to the media that he doesn't think the team wants him back?

3) leak to the media that he wants to be released if the team won't let him compete for his job back?

4) leak to the media that he wants to play for Minnesota if he can't play for Green Bay?

5) do an interview with Greta Van Susteren which is noteworthy for its softness and also his remarkably non-commital words which waffle between determination to return and wondering whether he's wanted?

6) leak to the media that he was offered $20M not to play (and rejected it because he was insulted)?

7) leak to the media that he doesn't want to play for the jets or Tampa?

8) fly to Green Bay with no resolution of his playing situation (if he is to be believed)?

9) leave the training facility rather than taking the practice field after saying he welcomed the chance to compete for his job?

If I worked at it I could probably come up with nine more questions along those lines.

If he did what I advocated - just unretire, report to camp, shut up and play ball - the Packers would either be forced by fan pressure to open up the QB job to competition, or to rid themselves of him. There'd be a media firestorm, but it would die down and be resolved, and nobody would be talking about soap operas. Again, I believe the logic of this is irrefutable, and I have yet to see a good argument against it, yes, including the ridiculous "he didn't want to be a distraction" argument.

He was a distraction all along, and still is. If he doesn't know this, he's not very bright.

 

[BigJim®]

Favre definitely dropped the ball by leaving Green Bay, huge. The only leverage he had was to be there demanding to practice as a constant distraction, which is obvious from the energy put into keeping him away from there. After all this, Brett is acqiescing to being traded to Tampa or the Jets? Can I please get my last 3 weeks back?

 

[FunkyPlutos]

How about this deal? (My own thinking here)

Favre to the Bucs for a 5th round pick. Favre doesn't play well enough to make the team. Bucs cut him. Vikings are "enamored" with Luke McCown. Vikings trade 3rd or 4th round pick to Bucs for Luke McCown. Luke isn't quite good enough for the Vikings. But hey Favre is a free agent. Vikings sign Favre. Wow. That worked out well.

 

[sho nuff]

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 isn't he doing it?He is the one putting a stop to that from happening.

According to Favre even.

If he was so dead set on playing for the Packers...screw this supposed distraction...get your ### to practice and quit whining about the GM.

What if he was told today by McCarthy that there would be no open competition?

Then was Brett lying when he said McCarthy asked him specifically about that?

 

[sho nuff]

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.

Umm...Favre also said McCarthy asked about it meaning he was ok with it too.And while Favre was apparently ok with it...it was he, according to Brett himself, that said it was probably not a good idea.

Why can't some of you understand that?

 

[sho nuff]

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

Huh? It was Favre who stated McCarthy asked him about having an open competition. It was Favre who stated that he thought Aaron should be the starter and that the competition was not the best idea.

 

[sho nuff]

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.

Given his actions so far...why do you think he cares that much about that?His actions so far have not been consistent with that.

 

[renesauz]

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.

Given his actions so far...why do you think he cares that much about that?His actions so far have not been consistent with that.

I've been pretty consistant in defending TT and criticizing BFs handling of all of this, but I have a hard time seeing this point. I think BF does honestly care about the Packers as a team, and his fellow players on the field. He's been a distraction but I don't believe he ever intended to hurt the team on the field. He simply can't accept that ANYONE would believe Rodgers the better choice for the team, and he's very hurt by it. His ego and his emotions are in the way, not his heart.

 

[sho nuff]

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.

no CB....the problem is that BF, and most of his supporters, can't even concieve of the possibility that he could lose said competition. Now, from a coaching GM standpoint, I would next wonder/ask: "Brett, if you lose the competition and we choose to start Rodgers, what will you do? Wil you back him up and lend your experiance to the coaching staff/SUPPORT US, or will you bolt (and attempt to undermine us in the press again). Regardless of who McCarthy thinks would win, if Brett wasn't willing to accept the consequences of losing the job, then it was NOT in the teams best interest to allow him to compete. It could very well be that BOTH sides would have welcomed an open competition, but couldn't agree on what would happen IF Brett actually lost.WOW...that gos right in line with ALL of McCarthy's comments like "Favre not being in the right mindset to return".Favre is upset because 1. He didn't feel like he was welcomed back with open arms from the SECOND he changed his mind (and why would he be??????)2. He can't accept that ANYBODY in the organization might honestly beleive Rodgers to be a better direction for the team. He is incapable of facing the consequences of losing the starting job in an "open" competition.These things are not stretches.

All speculation. No evidence that he was to be allowed to compete. Some to the opposite.So far it seems like Favre has largely told the truth. He was willing to compete. Anyone who thinks he was afraid to lose is pretty delusional.It looks like he was never going to be allowed to practice with other Packers. Or compete. When they said "we have moved on" they meant it. And then tried to force him to stay retired.The Packers were the ones afraid of a competition.

What evidence is there that he would not be allowed?Brett himself said McCarthy asked him about competing and that Brett said it would not be a good idea.Why do you think Brett says is the truth? he has changed his story multiple times. From the ESPN story, then the mariucci stuff after McCarthy talked.What is the evidence that it looks like he was never going to be able to compete or practice with the other players. Don't claim its all speculation and there is no evidence for one thing...and then go on to speculate with no evidence on another.I don't think the Packers are afraid of anything more than having an uncommitted QB who waffled multiple times this offseason and did not prepare for the year like he did before.If anyone heard Glazer on Mike and Mike this morning...you got a glimpse of some of that...if his sources are correct.

 

[sho nuff]

Interesting comments from long-time Packer beat writer Bob McGinn (hated by many, but in my opinion a great writer):

It’s time to go

Packers finally tell Favre that he’s not wanted

Posted: Aug. 5, 2008

Bob McGinn

E-MAIL

Green Bay - Several times over the years, Brett Favre would ponder his future in football and tell people that he would play "until the Packers don't want me anymore."

Underneath all the twists and turns, sources and stories, interviews and indignities, was one salient fact that never changed:

Favre wasn't wanted in Green Bay.

It took Favre almost seven months to figure it out, but figure it out he finally did Tuesday when Mike McCarthy at last gave it to him straight.

Then Favre drove out of Lambeau Field, in all probability never to wear the No. 4 jersey again that was front and center in one of the most amazing reclamation projects in National Football League history.

Parting company with any legendary athlete is next to impossible, but one with apparent usefulness is impossible. The Packers found themselves caught in a public-relations vice, trying to distance themselves from an all-time great who just wouldn't go away.

From a purely football perspective, the organizational shift against Favre began that November night in Dallas, gained steam in the arctic cold of Soldier Field and became a blaze during Favre's pathetic second-half showing against the New York Giants with a Super Bowl there for the taking.

Just about everyone who counted in the football department reached the conclusion that Favre could never win another championship. His dismal playoff record in the past decade couldn't be overlooked. And the Packers concluded that it would be the mother of all mistakes if Aaron Rodgers got away without being properly evaluated as a starter.

Favre had one chance, and one chance only, to salvage his career in Green Bay. He had to commit wholeheartedly for another season by early March.

One could argue that the Packers erred by asking Favre for an answer that early. But having been hung out to dry by Favre too often in the past, they were in no mood for drama. Their days of mollycoddling were over.

The Packers would have taken back Favre as the starter, albeit reluctantly, if he had acted like any other player and not some diva. That is, show up for work in late March, practice until mid-June and be in exceptional condition by July 28.

That's never too much to expect.

Once Favre tearfully retired, the die was cast. The singular comment made by Favre on March 6 that remains etched indelibly was his admission that he really didn't want the ball in the clutch anymore.

After that, the Packers cut the cord, and rightly so. Favre had come across to most as an emotionally spent 38-year-old with nothing left athletically that he cared to give.

Shortly after the draft, Mike McCarthy basically told his players that he was in charge of this team, not Favre, and that it was critical to rally around Rodgers. Then Rodgers began inviting players to his home. To McCarthy, the off-season is absolutely crucial, and with his entire being he anointed Rodgers.

No matter what Favre might have tried after March 6, he couldn't have turned the tide.

When Favre made overtures in late March about a return, the Packers felt compelled to go meet with him even though in reality they had little or no interest.

In late June, when Favre phoned McCarthy to tell him he might play, the Packers probably were dying inside.

And then came the last month, with Favre formally asking for his release, finally submitting his letter for reinstatement and then flying to Green Bay on Sunday night.

The Packers blame themselves for making some communication gaffes along the way, which they did. They gave away their motives by announcing plans far too early to retire Favre's jersey and to send him his locker. Ted Thompson hid behind too many no-comments.

But when the endgame is to remove a legend, there is no smooth way of doing it.

Favre went on to risk his future as a heroic figure in the state for perpetuity by his actions last month. All but calling Thompson a liar. Revealing intimate details of conversations with Thompson and McCarthy. Selling out offensive line coach James Campen after he went out of his way to help his old pal.

During one interview, Favre criticized Thompson for not interviewing his buddy, Steve Mariucci, for the job that went to McCarthy. After the horrendous job that Mariucci did in Detroit, Thompson would have been roasted for even considering Mariucci, let alone hiring him.

Those were just a few examples of Favre operating almost in a delusional state, hearing only what he wanted to hear and acting as if he was larger than the team.

Some would say, in fact some are saying, that the Packers would be nothing and will be nothing without Favre.

Nevertheless, this was the proper time to determine if that's true by going with one of several young men over one old man. McCarthy's expertise is in quarterback play. His future, as well as Thompson's, will hinge on developing the three quarterbacks on the roster. Failing that, they must quickly find another one who can play.

Last winter, the Packers began talks with Favre about giving him at least $20 million over 10 years in exchange for shaking some hands and making a few appearances. How can a $20 million golden parachute be construed as bribery?

It was a creative step by the organization to present Favre with an honorable go-away present, but in the end became just another decision that poisoned Favre's attitude toward the club.

Against this wholly expected backdrop of ugliness, the Packers will try to get something for Favre in trade. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers have been interested all along, but is Favre?

If Tampa Bay stays with Jeff Garcia, the Packers might well follow up on the feeler that they sent out Friday to the Minnesota Vikings.

As for Rodgers, he needs to shape up. After a promising first three days, he had relatively bad practices Friday, Saturday and Monday sandwiched around a subpar scrimmage Sunday.

Yes, it has been an untenable situation for Rodgers. OK, so what? Now it's time for Rodgers to start performing at the level that McCarthy keeps saying that he will. There's little else but McCarthy's track record to vouch for Rodgers at this point.

Speculation that the Packers might make it an open competition between Rodgers and Favre was a farce. The club floated that idea to promote trade value as well as to placate players, fans and coaches in the unlikely event that Favre got on the practice field.

If the job had been opened to Favre, it would have meant just one thing: McCarthy had lost faith in Rodgers after the first week.

The Packers, just like every other team in the NFC North, hope to win by rushing the ball and playing defense this season.

One week after the Giants loss, it was written here that Thompson's off-season agenda contained three major items: what to do about Favre, defensive coordinator Bob Sanders and the zone run game.

Green Bay made its preferred change on the first item, remaining status quo on the other two. Sanders and the run game had better be dynamic because the quarterbacking probably won't be nearly as good as it was in 2007, when an all-time great had a very good year.

The Packers went with the odds saying Favre never would play that well again. Now they need Rodgers to pull his weight for what has the makings almost everywhere else of being another top team.

Send e-mail to bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=780244

Great read. Sums it up perfectly. Both sides bear some major responsibility for what has happened. TT wanted to force out Favre. McCarthy and staff didn't think he could win the big one anymore. Favre couldn't decide whether to play or retire initially, then acted like a child w/ a temper tantrum for the past month.Rodgers is the QB now. Time to move on.

If by that you mean doing everything he could to PLAY for a team where he might be able to still win games, then okay.But I have seen no tantrum, just someone resenting being treated poorly and slighted. Favre gets especially bent when the FO says things that aren't true. Freaking child.

Count me as a child too.

Umm...what stuff was not true? You have some evidence of their lies?

 

[VTjkru]

I never thought it would get this ugly and Favre is obviously upset at the Packers organization (or specific members). Let's see he plays for another team and is really successful (super bowls, championship games, whatever he values as being really successful). When he finally retires and is set to enter the Hall of Fame, think there is any chance at all that he still holds a grudge against the Packers and doesnt enter the Hall as a Packer?

 

[sho nuff]

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.

Given his actions so far...why do you think he cares that much about that?His actions so far have not been consistent with that.

I've been pretty consistant in defending TT and criticizing BFs handling of all of this, but I have a hard time seeing this point. I think BF does honestly care about the Packers as a team, and his fellow players on the field. He's been a distraction but I don't believe he ever intended to hurt the team on the field. He simply can't accept that ANYONE would believe Rodgers the better choice for the team, and he's very hurt by it. His ego and his emotions are in the way, not his heart.

I think he does care about them...but that he is still putting himself above all that.His constant media leaks, throwing Campen under the bus, showing up at family night rather than just coming in Monday...I think he intended to make as big of a distraction as possible to try and get what he wanted.

 

[sho nuff]

I never thought it would get this ugly and Favre is obviously upset at the Packers organization (or specific members). Let's see he plays for another team and is really successful (super bowls, championship games, whatever he values as being really successful). When he finally retires and is set to enter the Hall of Fame, think there is any chance at all that he still holds a grudge against the Packers and doesnt enter the Hall as a Packer?

I guess it may depend if Thompson is still around.

 

[sho nuff]

If anyone heard this on Mike and Mike this morning...and believes Glazer...but still think its all Ted's fault, they might be brain dead.

He was very clear that he feels his sources are solid...that they had plenty of evidence to support their claims.

This goes back to the whole timeline thing and what Favre apparently thinks is not true.

Favre did, according to these sources, contact Ted and McCarthy right around the time of the owners meetings in March saying he wanted to come back. They asked him if he was willing then to help out more with Rodgers because he was the future of the team. Brett was pumped up about it and ready to go. They have it documented where they had the press release ready, the had the jet ready. This is documented somewhere. Brett called 2 days later not long before it was supposed to happen and said no, he was staying retired. They asked if he was sure, saying they had everything all ready, lets just do this. He said no.

Right before the draft, he called them again, stating he wanted to come back. They again asked if he was sure, that they needed a firm committment...he waivered and said again that he thinks he might just stay retired.

They said this went on several times this offseason. They would get calls from Brett that he thought he might want to come back. And each time he waffled and then said he was staying retired.

That when Thompson went to visit him in May...just to talk about anything. Favre again confirmed he was staying retired.

He was made aware that if Brett was not coming back, they had to move forward. He understood that.

June comes and he decides he is now supposedly ready. They then got irritated saying "Brett, you cannot do this to us now, we have moved on...you had plenty of chances to do this and waivered each time" That is a paraphrase not really a direct quote. It was then that Brett got mad and said something along the lines of give me my helmet or give me my release. And it kept escalating from there.

Its like the boy who cried wolf...they kept believing him and believing him and believing him...until finally they had to move on and put it behind them.

If all of this is true...and yes, its a big if as it is according to some unnamed sources...then I don't see anything Ted could have done outside of going down and blowing Brett himself to beg him to come back.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

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.

no CB....the problem is that BF, and most of his supporters, can't even concieve of the possibility that he could lose said competition. Now, from a coaching GM standpoint, I would next wonder/ask: "Brett, if you lose the competition and we choose to start Rodgers, what will you do? Wil you back him up and lend your experiance to the coaching staff/SUPPORT US, or will you bolt (and attempt to undermine us in the press again). Regardless of who McCarthy thinks would win, if Brett wasn't willing to accept the consequences of losing the job, then it was NOT in the teams best interest to allow him to compete. It could very well be that BOTH sides would have welcomed an open competition, but couldn't agree on what would happen IF Brett actually lost.WOW...that gos right in line with ALL of McCarthy's comments like "Favre not being in the right mindset to return".Favre is upset because 1. He didn't feel like he was welcomed back with open arms from the SECOND he changed his mind (and why would he be??????)2. He can't accept that ANYBODY in the organization might honestly beleive Rodgers to be a better direction for the team. He is incapable of facing the consequences of losing the starting job in an "open" competition.These things are not stretches.

Can you please show me where I said that Favre couldn't lose the open competition? Hell in an earlier thread about this I suggested that Green Bay make him the loser of the open competition regardless of the real results. You need to come with something better than that.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

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.

no CB....the problem is that BF, and most of his supporters, can't even concieve of the possibility that he could lose said competition. Now, from a coaching GM standpoint, I would next wonder/ask: "Brett, if you lose the competition and we choose to start Rodgers, what will you do? Wil you back him up and lend your experiance to the coaching staff/SUPPORT US, or will you bolt (and attempt to undermine us in the press again). Regardless of who McCarthy thinks would win, if Brett wasn't willing to accept the consequences of losing the job, then it was NOT in the teams best interest to allow him to compete. It could very well be that BOTH sides would have welcomed an open competition, but couldn't agree on what would happen IF Brett actually lost.WOW...that gos right in line with ALL of McCarthy's comments like "Favre not being in the right mindset to return".Favre is upset because 1. He didn't feel like he was welcomed back with open arms from the SECOND he changed his mind (and why would he be??????)2. He can't accept that ANYBODY in the organization might honestly beleive Rodgers to be a better direction for the team. He is incapable of facing the consequences of losing the starting job in an "open" competition.These things are not stretches.

All speculation. No evidence that he was to be allowed to compete. Some to the opposite.So far it seems like Favre has largely told the truth. He was willing to compete. Anyone who thinks he was afraid to lose is pretty delusional.It looks like he was never going to be allowed to practice with other Packers. Or compete. When they said "we have moved on" they meant it. And then tried to force him to stay retired.The Packers were the ones afraid of a competition.

 

[sho nuff]

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.

no CB....the problem is that BF, and most of his supporters, can't even concieve of the possibility that he could lose said competition. Now, from a coaching GM standpoint, I would next wonder/ask: "Brett, if you lose the competition and we choose to start Rodgers, what will you do? Wil you back him up and lend your experiance to the coaching staff/SUPPORT US, or will you bolt (and attempt to undermine us in the press again). Regardless of who McCarthy thinks would win, if Brett wasn't willing to accept the consequences of losing the job, then it was NOT in the teams best interest to allow him to compete. It could very well be that BOTH sides would have welcomed an open competition, but couldn't agree on what would happen IF Brett actually lost.WOW...that gos right in line with ALL of McCarthy's comments like "Favre not being in the right mindset to return".Favre is upset because 1. He didn't feel like he was welcomed back with open arms from the SECOND he changed his mind (and why would he be??????)2. He can't accept that ANYBODY in the organization might honestly beleive Rodgers to be a better direction for the team. He is incapable of facing the consequences of losing the starting job in an "open" competition.These things are not stretches.

All speculation. No evidence that he was to be allowed to compete. Some to the opposite.So far it seems like Favre has largely told the truth. He was willing to compete. Anyone who thinks he was afraid to lose is pretty delusional.It looks like he was never going to be allowed to practice with other Packers. Or compete. When they said "we have moved on" they meant it. And then tried to force him to stay retired.The Packers were the ones afraid of a competition.

So a posting where a guy claims someone else is speculating...but goes on to speculate with no evidence himself is now a good posting?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

If Favre really wanted to do nothing more than compete, he would be in camp right now. It's clear to me he never wanted anything except being released so he could sign with Minnesota. He never had any intention of playing for the Packers from the start. That's my opinion.

I think you're wrong about that and I think there's enough evidence in the quotes provided in this thread to refute that pretty well. Maybe you didn't read the thread?

 

[Eric Stratton]

If all of this is true...and yes, its a big if as it is according to some unnamed sources...then I don't see anything Ted could have done outside of going down and blowing Brett himself to beg him to come back.

I really hope this gets you some time away from here. Your biased support of TT is sickening.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

It is crystal clear now that the Packers moved on after his March retirement. So with that if Brett truly wants to play football he will be traded in the next 24-48 hours. I was wrong in calling out MM. He is just a coach in the middle of this mess trying to prepare his football team. However TT for all the great work he has done rebuidling the talent in Green Bay will be remembered as the guy who closed the door on the PAckers all time most popular player and the current face of the NFL. I will stand by my statement though that if Rodgers flops (and i think he will). Thompson will be run out of town in a New York minute. Rodgers is a stiff. A hig draft pick that will end up being a mistake. Not anything new when it comes to QB busts.I am calling it now. I am not waiting to watch him play in a real NFL game...I have seen enough with his pre-seasons and that Family night....OMG...brutal.

TT can be redeemed in two ways. 1) Rodgers succeedes.2) Favre continues to play and shows that he's washed up, or at least that he's incapable of winning another championship.People seem to discount the latter, but I think it's a real possibility. Nobody has said Aaron Rodgers is great or is a sure-fire winner, just that it's now time for them to evaluate him. Only the Favre crowd seems to ignore that.

I think it's likely that he declines this year regardless of where he plays. But let's be honest, if your only "redemption" for Favre is that he wins a SB in the two years or so he has left, you're not being fair. I also think that Rodgers is going to be Kyle Boller part 2 and have said so long before this started. He just isn't that good.

 

[H.K.]

Umm...what stuff was not true? You have some evidence of their lies?

Tampering by Minnesota allegations were proven to be false.

 

[Eric Stratton]

If all of this is true...and yes, its a big if as it is according to some unnamed sources...then I don't see anything Ted could have done outside of going down and blowing Brett himself to beg him to come back.

January 21st TT-"Brett that was a tough loss yesterday to the Giants but we want you back next year and take your time with your decision to return. We will welcome you with open arms next year"Brett-"Thanks and I appreciate that"A few more follow up conversations like that in February and Brett would have been back. That didn't happen because TT and McCarthy DID NOT WANT FAVRE BACK!!! Why do the TT supporters try and ignore this key component to this mess?

 

[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.

Umm...Favre also said McCarthy asked about it meaning he was ok with it too.And while Favre was apparently ok with it...it was he, according to Brett himself, that said it was probably not a good idea.

Why can't some of you understand that?

LOL, of course we understand that. But it doesn't make your argument any stronger. Your argument is that Favre doesn't want to compete for the job. We have presented you with a quote that MM and BF have both said they are fine with that in theory, but that given the current situation it isn't fair to Aaron. So now you are using that to try to say that Brett is against a competition or is too good for a competition?

Seriously?