Farve Reinstated; expected to report Monday (1 Viewer)

[Kleck]

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Brett Favre just pooped. Then didn't wash his hands as he left.

Did he use the TP or the 3 seashells?

Baby wipes.

 

[sho nuff]

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Brett Favre just pooped. Then didn't wash his hands as he left.

Did he use the TP or the 3 seashells?

Baby wipes.

Good call.Especially good if you have a wipe warmer.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Did you guys hear Mariucci on NFL Network after the press conference. Favre is telling his friend Mariucci a very different side of the story. Saying Favre wants to play and wants to play nowhere but Green Bay. Said he'd consider other places if he had to.But the underlying problem was that what the front office said to the press about wanting him back wasn't their true feelings. And that he didn't want to be a distraction if the front office didn't really want him there. Mooch was asked about McCarthy's talk of Favre not being committed and Mariucci said that was not a factor at all.Obviously, two different sides to the story. I'm sure Favre must be lying though... J

But again...this goes against Favre's own claims that McCarthy asked him about competing and that it was Favre who was saying while he would do it, he did not think it was the right thing to do.What side does Favre really want to present.Can you see why people are saying Favre is still waffling?Even in his own words he is not clear about what is going on.And isn't it convenient that he says those things to Mooch after McCarthy's press conference when opinion started to shift again negatively for Favre?

What would make you think opinion was shifting against Favre after the press conference? McCarthy spoke well of Favre and seemed sympathetic repeatedly saying Favre was in a "tough spot".J

 

[amphibianbri]

I'm not at all angry at GB management for wanting to move on, especially since if they let Favre play this year on the last year of Rodgers' contract. Favre plays then walks away, Rodgers has been paid #1 draft pick money and never played and probably walks, and the Packers have to go to Brohm. I get that and don't blame them for the decision, but here's what I don't get at this point. If a) McCarthy doesn't think Favre is ready emotionally / mentally to lead a team and b) It looks as though Thompson doesn't want him around and wants to give Rodgers a shot then why would you be afraid that Favre comes back to burn you? You're willing to trade him to a team that sucks, but we don't want him playing against us. That confuses me. If a) is true, then let an unstable Favre go ruin Minnesota's season (since the Bears are dumb enough to think that Grossman / Orton is the answer and aren't interested, even though their defense is getting older by the minute). If it's b), then again, why agree to trade him to another club outside the division? If you think Rodgers and the team you have assembled are good enough, then Favre shouldn't be a threat. I know Favre put them in a kind of predicament with this timing, but besides the season "because they can", why can't the Packers get a draft pick for Favre, move on, and honestly say they were doing what was best for both parties?

 

[sho nuff]

Did you guys hear Mariucci on NFL Network after the press conference. Favre is telling his friend Mariucci a very different side of the story. Saying Favre wants to play and wants to play nowhere but Green Bay. Said he'd consider other places if he had to.But the underlying problem was that what the front office said to the press about wanting him back wasn't their true feelings. And that he didn't want to be a distraction if the front office didn't really want him there. Mooch was asked about McCarthy's talk of Favre not being committed and Mariucci said that was not a factor at all.Obviously, two different sides to the story. I'm sure Favre must be lying though... J

But again...this goes against Favre's own claims that McCarthy asked him about competing and that it was Favre who was saying while he would do it, he did not think it was the right thing to do.What side does Favre really want to present.Can you see why people are saying Favre is still waffling?Even in his own words he is not clear about what is going on.And isn't it convenient that he says those things to Mooch after McCarthy's press conference when opinion started to shift again negatively for Favre?

What would make you think opinion was shifting against Favre after the press conference? McCarthy spoke well of Favre and seemed sympathetic repeatedly saying Favre was in a "tough spot".J

Just judging the reaction on this board.Prior to much of this...there were so many more vocal people killing the Packers an on Favre's side.That seemed to switch a bunch today.I may have even predicted that once McCarthy spoke something would come out from Favre...and lo and behold...he does another interview with Mooch.I don't know who to believe anymore. I don't think either side can be trusted at this point.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

You are going on pure speculation...Im going on things that have actually for sure happened...like Favre's dislike of TT before this year.

Good point, I'm sure we can all remember those long Brett Favre press conferences where he bashed TT. Wait.....

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

McCarthy's now referring to Favre having a "negative mindset".

"It's very personal for him".

This sounds like, according to McCarthy, Favre's holding too much of a grudge and isn't ready to work as part of the team. Wow.

My thoughts exactly as I watched the presser.

:(

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Did you guys hear Mariucci on NFL Network after the press conference. Favre is telling his friend Mariucci a very different side of the story. Saying Favre wants to play and wants to play nowhere but Green Bay. Said he'd consider other places if he had to.But the underlying problem was that what the front office said to the press about wanting him back wasn't their true feelings. And that he didn't want to be a distraction if the front office didn't really want him there. Mooch was asked about McCarthy's talk of Favre not being committed and Mariucci said that was not a factor at all.Obviously, two different sides to the story. I'm sure Favre must be lying though... J

But again...this goes against Favre's own claims that McCarthy asked him about competing and that it was Favre who was saying while he would do it, he did not think it was the right thing to do.What side does Favre really want to present.Can you see why people are saying Favre is still waffling?Even in his own words he is not clear about what is going on.And isn't it convenient that he says those things to Mooch after McCarthy's press conference when opinion started to shift again negatively for Favre?

What would make you think opinion was shifting against Favre after the press conference? McCarthy spoke well of Favre and seemed sympathetic repeatedly saying Favre was in a "tough spot".J

Just judging the reaction on this board.Prior to much of this...there were so many more vocal people killing the Packers an on Favre's side.That seemed to switch a bunch today.I may have even predicted that once McCarthy spoke something would come out from Favre...and lo and behold...he does another interview with Mooch.I don't know who to believe anymore. I don't think either side can be trusted at this point.

Do you think this board is a representative sample of Packer fans?

 

[MSULions]

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.

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.

 

[MSULions]

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?

Which is totally myopic. so he should be allowed to ruin a franchises ability to play and evaluate the one heir apparent they have in his final contract year because he feels like it? winning a couple extra games this year - and i'm not even convinced that's remotely assured with a 38 year old qb - is meaningless when compared to the benefit of having Rodgers FINALLY get his chance to prove himself. This "he gives them the best chance NOW" is incredibly short sighted and ignores the numerous long term ramifications of letting the petulant baby have his way.

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

Excellent job by McCarthy in a very tough situation. Packer fans can be very confident going forward given the impressive professionalism, leadership and dedication shown by Thompson and McCarthy throughout this difficult saga. Certainly, they have always wanted to be able to put #4 up on the wall at Lambeau next to 3, 14, 15, 66 and 92, and I think they've maintained the ability to still bestow that tremendous honor on a great fomer Packer.

I usually always agree with you but you FO blinders are on bigtime here. You are absolving TT and McCarthy here and placing no blame on them for this trainwreck and that's just wrong.

 

[Joe Bryant]

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.

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

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

I hate the Packers with all of my being eta: I wish death to the franchise

Lighten up Francis.

 

[MSULions]

First, let's define "getting what he wants". I think what is motivating Favre is a desire to make Thompson (and likely McCarthy too) look as bad as possible. He's not liked their stewardship of the team for years, so this is his revenge. He'd like to get back onto the field and play, but he wants to accomplish that - either with the Packers or with another team - in a way that's as painful as possible to them.

So, with that in mind, here's what he's done:

1) repeatedly delayed making a retirement decision in the offseason;

2) publicly bashed Thompson for failing to resign Wahle and another OL, and for failing to sign Moss;

3) retired, then unretired and changed his mind, then re-unretired in June;

4) immediately bellyaching that Thompson and the team don't want him back;

5) leaking the now-infamous $20M bribe/marketing deal that was offered to him, to the media;

6) delaying the application for reinstatement needlessly, all while making equivocal statements in the Van Susteren interview about returning to play;

7) claiming today either that McCarthy told him he couldn't compete for the starting job, or claiming he voluntarily wouldn't compete for the starting job because he'd be a "distraction";

8) refusing to practice today.

This struggle is about perception among Packers fans and even football fans about who has made the team successful in recent years, who controls it going forward, and even who has created this retirement mess. Perhaps these tactics are best illustrated by what Favre could have done had this really been about returning to the playing field as he said it was. Here's what such a person would do:

1) announce clearly and unequivocally that you weren't ready after all to retire and you want to return;

2) apply immediately to the league for reinstatement;

3) report to camp.

That's it. That's what you do if you just want to play with no other agenda. Then, the ball is in the Packers' court, and either the Packers accept his return or they cut him or trade him. Any unfair treatment of him beyond that point is laid at the team's feet. If he didn't want to cooperate with them in a trade scenario as is his right by renegotiating his contract, he doesn't agree to renegotiate his contract and they'll probably have to cut him. So be it. Nobody would ever blame Favre for that.

This is how adults handle things. Instead, Favre has gradually escalated this mess, all the while whining about how the team doesn't really want him back.

Stop whining Brett. Force their hand by playing football.

you forgot:9) Demanding a trade to the team's primary divisional rival - an utterly unprecedented (and unattainable - by design imho) demand for a player of his stature.

 

[amphibianbri]

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?

Which is totally myopic. so he should be allowed to ruin a franchises ability to play and evaluate the one heir apparent they have in his final contract year because he feels like it? winning a couple extra games this year - and i'm not even convinced that's remotely assured with a 38 year old qb - is meaningless when compared to the benefit of having Rodgers FINALLY get his chance to prove himself. This "he gives them the best chance NOW" is incredibly short sighted and ignores the numerous long term ramifications of letting the petulant baby have his way.

This kind of goes with my point above.......he'll move out of the way for Rodgers so the Pack can try him out this year, but I don't get this him ruin the franchises ability to evaluate Rodgers. If he wanted to do that, he'd compete and very possibly, win the job, starting the one year disaster I described for the Packer organization above (for the future). They want to "honor" him by paying him $25 million to stay away and they want to move on. OK, just let him go play if you don't want him anymore. If he was such the tool that most are now calling him, why wouldn't he stay, possibly win the job, or sit on the bench and have the Pack pay him 12.5 million?

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

An interesting article from NBC Sports. http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/26040067/

From the article......

A league personnel man told me Monday night that the Packers are paying right now for the inexperience of their top-level guys and the fact that there isn’t an owner to step in and say, “Enough.

I heard this from another source on the radio as well. Saying this is a total lack of leadership starting from the top down and had Ron Wolf and Bob Harlan still been in charge, this circus would have never gotten off the ground.I agree a complete failure starting from the top on down.

Favre started this mess, tried to rectify it, and the FO starting with TT had no clue how to handle it....... And it shows.

Too many egos got in the way here starting with TT HUGE ego.

 

[T Bell]

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.

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

No, I tend to accept Mariucci at his word. The question is, is Favre to be believed when he tells Mooch this stuff?

 

[fatness]

Support for Favre is growing

 

[fatness]

No, I tend to accept Mariucci at his word. The question is, is Favre to be believed when he tells Mooch this stuff?

The other question is: what are Favre's conditions for playing in Green Bay?

 

[Kleck]

One thing is for sure. The players who showed up to OTAs and TC on time and ready to play are very much sick of this. I thought Driver was going to go postal on reporters during a locker room clip shown on local TV tonight. You could also hear a few other voices in the background telling reporters to stop it and leave them alone about it.

Edit: Just saw a shorter version of it. Maybe not postal. Just wore out, tired of hearing about and being asked about. You could tell he is very sick of it all.

 

[T Bell]

Support for Favre is growing

Are you implying that he's going to accidentally overdose on Mydol, and Bus Cook is going to tell us that it wasn't a suicide attempt because, "He's got 12 million reasons to live"?

 

[malaka]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

 

[renesauz]

I have a very serious question for the Favre supporters in this.

Over and over again, I have heard guys say Favre should be allowed to at least compete for the starting job. Over and over again, I've said that just wasn't possible.

The reason I have said that is simple: Those who support Favre seem 100% convinced that Favre would win. This assumption is so strong that those same posters who call for the "open competition" have repeatedly called out TT, the Packers, and all other posters who've said "he might not be". IE: How is it "OPEN" if you've already decided Brett is better?

Personally, I think Rodgers might actually be better at this point in their respective careers, but Brett seems to have come into the whole thing the same way his supporters have....with the underlying assumption that Favre wins any competition and the very strong implication that any competition that resulted in any different result must have been fixed or flawed.

Even Joe Bryant seems to believe this, based on the tone of his posts.

Rodgers could very well be the better QB, but only time will tell. I would challenge anyone on this board who truly believes that Rodgers is better right now -- please point specifically to why you believe this. He's barely played, and when he has, he's been injured each time. (Baltimore a couple years ago when he broke his ankle, then last year vs. Dallas when he strained a hamstring) In contrast, Favre is a 3-time MVP who led the team to the NFC Championship Game last season. Again, Rodgers could be better, but Favre supporters aren't exactly the ones who need to make a case here. I'm a GB homer, so given where we stand today, I would LOVE to see Aaron Rodgers become a perennial Pro Bowler. AND take the team to a Super Bowl in 2008.

I can't fault anybody for thinking Favre the better QB...but I can fault them for being so sure of themselves that they have been downright rude to those of an opposing opinion. (Anyone who has openly supported TT in this thread has been repeatedly attacked/mocked...even Tremblay has been called out.)

I've certainly been guilty of a couple rude comments. (haven't most people on this board at some point?) But you're right, they have no place on this board.But renesuaz, I think you have selective memory here. Plenty of Favre "supporters" have been bashed and berated repeatedly in this thread. It has definitely gone both directions.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the Favre camp, and many of his supporters have made it incredibly difficult to even talk rationally because of the underlying assumption that favre is still one of the greatest CURRENT QB's in the NFL, and that the job should be his just because he wants it. I have a real problem with that kind of arrogance, and I suspect that many coaches and GMs would also, even if the player were a little better then the young guy replacing him.

Again, this has gone both ways. Both sides have found it difficult to talk rationally for some reason.As far as the assumption that Favre is better than Rodgers, again, I think the onus is on Rodgers supporters to explain why they would believe otherwise. We have, I would argue, no substantive proof to suggest Rodgers is better. Though he may prove to be ultimately. (again, I hope so)

With this kind of attitude, why would TT or McCarthy want him on their team, no matter how good he is?

This is a gigantic leap.

To begin with...this observor think's Favre is probably better this year...I'm just not 100% convinced of it. In other words, I'm very open to the possibility that Rodgers has passed him, and when the actions/statements of his head coach and GM seem to imply that, I'm ready to at least consider the possibility. I think you're correct in that the onus of proof should be on the Rodgers believers, but the Favre believers won't accept any offered proof. Maurile tried, and was ignored or mocked. The Favre camp is so entrenched in their belief in Brett Favre's abilities as a QB that nothing short of a full probowl season from Rodgers or a horrible (not NFL average as Brett had those in 05/06, and it wasn't enough!) season from Favre will allow the typical Favre supporter to accept the possibility that he may no longer be the best.At the very least, I believe Favre is now merely average. I say that with all due respect for legendary career, but I don't think this is that a far stretch.

Now, is it really that far a stretch to say that after all this time on the bench Rodgers is ready to start at at least an average level of competency?

Now, when you have a THIRTY EIGHT y.o. WAFFLING, EXPENSIVE, average QB (with nowhere left to go but down)and a young, promising, (believed to be at least average) QB (with presumably nowhere to go but up)...where do you go? Normally, this is a no-brainer decision...you go with the young guy. But the Packers can't simply because the old guy is a legend with multiple pro-bowls and a SB ring?

Really...you probably are right. Experiance is on his side if everything else is equal. Favre may be the better choice this year...but that margin may be built on nothing BUT experiance that Rodgers can't get until he can play.

The Packers moved on completely from the Favre era because they had to, and because the sad reality is that it was time...they had a young QB groomed and ready to go, a QB they might well lose if they bow to Favre's wishes now. Is that experiance edge worth losing Rodgers over? I don't believe so.

Again...I can't fault those who believe it is. I can't fault those who still believe he's an above-average QB (after all, his numbers in 07 were solid, despite dissapointing numbers in 05/06) I can't fault those who still believe Favre the better choice, future be damned...but I can fault those so absolutely convinced of this opinion that they readily dismiss the decisions and opinions of the PROVEN head coach and GM as "loony" and ridicule any poster in here who thinks to support them.

I believe that TT and the coach decided back in February that Rodgers really was the better direction for the team to head in this season. But they know the fanatic, blind loyalty of Favre's fans. They breathed a huge sigh of relief when Favre re-iterated his desire to be retired. Heck...maybe they did encourage that decision. They probably did drag their feet, try to encourage him to stay retired, even bribe him for it.

All of that was easier then trying to convince him, and all his fans, that he's no longer the best choice for the Packers.

Whats easier....encouraging a legend to retire, or benching that legend?

IE: All of the TT bashers could be right in his scheming. Maybe he has lied. Maybe. Or maybe he was just trying to be kind to both Favre and his fans? Maybe he knew he could never convince the Favre faithful that Favre is no longer the best QB for them?

Maybe this is what the long talks between coach and Favre were all about, and why Favre has backed off of wanting an open competition?

Maybe my other post contains a lot of truth...that Favre's ego is in the way, and he really is a primaDonna expecting the job to be handed to him, and that attitude is the final deciding straw against him? How many personal attacks does the GM put up with in the press...how many second guessed decisions? Maybe Favre is struggling to accept the reality of his own mortality and diminishing skills?

Maybe we all need to take a big collective breath and realize that this situatuion is far more complicated then it appears on the surface.

I don't blame Favre for wanting to still play, but I do blame him for how he's gone about it.

I don't blame y'all for still loving/supporting him, but I do blame you for doing so with a closed mind. There is another defensible, and logical alternative opinion.

 

[renesauz]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I honestly belive this. I think Brett is in shoc that the coach and GM no longer believe in him to lead the team on the field.

 

[Joe Bryant]

No, I tend to accept Mariucci at his word. The question is, is Favre to be believed when he tells Mooch this stuff?

The other question is: what are Favre's conditions for playing in Green Bay?

If you believe Mariucci / Favre, the conditions are nothing more than to have a shot to compete for the job and that the front office wants them back.J

 

[Joe Bryant]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I can see this. It's just a vibe, but I don't feel like he has much interest in Tampa or NY or anywhere else really.J

 

[Raider Nation]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I can see this. It's just a vibe, but I don't feel like he has much interest in Tampa or NY or anywhere else really.

I hope Green Bay goes 0-16.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Another interesting point on NFL radio tonight.

One of the hosts was talking about how proven McCarthy and Thompson were and that he couldn't understand why people weren't giving them the benefit of the doubt. That they knew football and they were convinced Rodgers was the guy. The guy saying this had played for Chicago.

The other host laughed and said "you guys had smart people that were convinced Cade McNown was the guy."

Or Tim Couch, Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, David Carr and the list goes on.

J

 

[Jimmy James]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I can see this. It's just a vibe, but I don't feel like he has much interest in Tampa or NY or anywhere else really.

I hope Green Bay goes 0-16.

I don't care what the record is, but I want the QB situation to be so bad that by a month into the season they're burning TT in effigy. I'd actually like the rest of the team to play really well so it is painfully obvious that these morons made a terrible choice.

 

[T Bell]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I can see this. It's just a vibe, but I don't feel like he has much interest in Tampa or NY or anywhere else really.J

Anywhere else, except Minnesota that is. Let's not let St. Brett off the hook too easily.

 

[amphibianbri]

I have a very serious question for the Favre supporters in this.

Over and over again, I have heard guys say Favre should be allowed to at least compete for the starting job. Over and over again, I've said that just wasn't possible.

The reason I have said that is simple: Those who support Favre seem 100% convinced that Favre would win. This assumption is so strong that those same posters who call for the "open competition" have repeatedly called out TT, the Packers, and all other posters who've said "he might not be". IE: How is it "OPEN" if you've already decided Brett is better?

Personally, I think Rodgers might actually be better at this point in their respective careers, but Brett seems to have come into the whole thing the same way his supporters have....with the underlying assumption that Favre wins any competition and the very strong implication that any competition that resulted in any different result must have been fixed or flawed.

Even Joe Bryant seems to believe this, based on the tone of his posts.

Rodgers could very well be the better QB, but only time will tell. I would challenge anyone on this board who truly believes that Rodgers is better right now -- please point specifically to why you believe this. He's barely played, and when he has, he's been injured each time. (Baltimore a couple years ago when he broke his ankle, then last year vs. Dallas when he strained a hamstring) In contrast, Favre is a 3-time MVP who led the team to the NFC Championship Game last season. Again, Rodgers could be better, but Favre supporters aren't exactly the ones who need to make a case here. I'm a GB homer, so given where we stand today, I would LOVE to see Aaron Rodgers become a perennial Pro Bowler. AND take the team to a Super Bowl in 2008.

I can't fault anybody for thinking Favre the better QB...but I can fault them for being so sure of themselves that they have been downright rude to those of an opposing opinion. (Anyone who has openly supported TT in this thread has been repeatedly attacked/mocked...even Tremblay has been called out.)

I've certainly been guilty of a couple rude comments. (haven't most people on this board at some point?) But you're right, they have no place on this board.But renesuaz, I think you have selective memory here. Plenty of Favre "supporters" have been bashed and berated repeatedly in this thread. It has definitely gone both directions.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the Favre camp, and many of his supporters have made it incredibly difficult to even talk rationally because of the underlying assumption that favre is still one of the greatest CURRENT QB's in the NFL, and that the job should be his just because he wants it. I have a real problem with that kind of arrogance, and I suspect that many coaches and GMs would also, even if the player were a little better then the young guy replacing him.

Again, this has gone both ways. Both sides have found it difficult to talk rationally for some reason.As far as the assumption that Favre is better than Rodgers, again, I think the onus is on Rodgers supporters to explain why they would believe otherwise. We have, I would argue, no substantive proof to suggest Rodgers is better. Though he may prove to be ultimately. (again, I hope so)

With this kind of attitude, why would TT or McCarthy want him on their team, no matter how good he is?

This is a gigantic leap.

To begin with...this observor think's Favre is probably better this year...I'm just not 100% convinced of it. In other words, I'm very open to the possibility that Rodgers has passed him, and when the actions/statements of his head coach and GM seem to imply that, I'm ready to at least consider the possibility. I think you're correct in that the onus of proof should be on the Rodgers believers, but the Favre believers won't accept any offered proof. Maurile tried, and was ignored or mocked. The Favre camp is so entrenched in their belief in Brett Favre's abilities as a QB that nothing short of a full probowl season from Rodgers or a horrible (not NFL average as Brett had those in 05/06, and it wasn't enough!) season from Favre will allow the typical Favre supporter to accept the possibility that he may no longer be the best.At the very least, I believe Favre is now merely average. I say that with all due respect for legendary career, but I don't think this is that a far stretch.

Now, is it really that far a stretch to say that after all this time on the bench Rodgers is ready to start at at least an average level of competency?

Now, when you have a THIRTY EIGHT y.o. WAFFLING, EXPENSIVE, average QB (with nowhere left to go but down)and a young, promising, (believed to be at least average) QB (with presumably nowhere to go but up)...where do you go? Normally, this is a no-brainer decision...you go with the young guy. But the Packers can't simply because the old guy is a legend with multiple pro-bowls and a SB ring?

Really...you probably are right. Experiance is on his side if everything else is equal. Favre may be the better choice this year...but that margin may be built on nothing BUT experiance that Rodgers can't get until he can play.

The Packers moved on completely from the Favre era because they had to, and because the sad reality is that it was time...they had a young QB groomed and ready to go, a QB they might well lose if they bow to Favre's wishes now. Is that experiance edge worth losing Rodgers over? I don't believe so.

Again...I can't fault those who believe it is. I can't fault those who still believe he's an above-average QB (after all, his numbers in 07 were solid, despite dissapointing numbers in 05/06) I can't fault those who still believe Favre the better choice, future be damned...but I can fault those so absolutely convinced of this opinion that they readily dismiss the decisions and opinions of the PROVEN head coach and GM as "loony" and ridicule any poster in here who thinks to support them.

I believe that TT and the coach decided back in February that Rodgers really was the better direction for the team to head in this season. But they know the fanatic, blind loyalty of Favre's fans. They breathed a huge sigh of relief when Favre re-iterated his desire to be retired. Heck...maybe they did encourage that decision. They probably did drag their feet, try to encourage him to stay retired, even bribe him for it.

All of that was easier then trying to convince him, and all his fans, that he's no longer the best choice for the Packers.

Whats easier....encouraging a legend to retire, or benching that legend?

IE: All of the TT bashers could be right in his scheming. Maybe he has lied. Maybe. Or maybe he was just trying to be kind to both Favre and his fans? Maybe he knew he could never convince the Favre faithful that Favre is no longer the best QB for them?

Maybe this is what the long talks between coach and Favre were all about, and why Favre has backed off of wanting an open competition?

Maybe my other post contains a lot of truth...that Favre's ego is in the way, and he really is a primaDonna expecting the job to be handed to him, and that attitude is the final deciding straw against him? How many personal attacks does the GM put up with in the press...how many second guessed decisions? Maybe Favre is struggling to accept the reality of his own mortality and diminishing skills?

Maybe we all need to take a big collective breath and realize that this situatuion is far more complicated then it appears on the surface.

I don't blame Favre for wanting to still play, but I do blame him for how he's gone about it.

I don't blame y'all for still loving/supporting him, but I do blame you for doing so with a closed mind. There is another defensible, and logical alternative opinion.

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.

 

[T Bell]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I can see this. It's just a vibe, but I don't feel like he has much interest in Tampa or NY or anywhere else really.

I hope Green Bay goes 0-16.

I don't care what the record is, but I want the QB situation to be so bad that by a month into the season they're burning TT in effigy. I'd actually like the rest of the team to play really well so it is painfully obvious that these morons made a terrible choice.

Are you a Green Bay fan? If so, you're sounding as foolish as many of your bretheren were saying Ted Thompson was for being "spiteful" towards Favre at the expense of the team.

 

[Raider Nation]

Another interesting point on NFL radio tonight.One of the hosts was talking about how proven McCarthy and Thompson were and that he couldn't understand why people weren't giving them the benefit of the doubt. That they knew football and they were convinced Rodgers was the guy. The guy saying this had played for Chicago.The other host laughed and said "you guys had smart people that were convinced Cade McNown was the guy."

I love when the pro-Favre people argue how Rodgers dropped to the 24th pick in the draft (therefore, he must suck)... Skip Bayless, for one, used this stupid arguement on 1st & 10 a few days ago. Have these people bothered to look and see where Brett was drafted?

 

[Joe Bryant]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I can see this. It's just a vibe, but I don't feel like he has much interest in Tampa or NY or anywhere else really.J

Anywhere else, except Minnesota that is. Let's not let St. Brett off the hook too easily.

I don't think his heart is in playing for MIN or CHI either. That's my gut feel. I think Mooch knows him pretty well. And he seemed pretty adamant that Green Bay was where he wanted to be. Again, one of them could be lying.J

 

[Joe Bryant]

Another interesting point on NFL radio tonight.One of the hosts was talking about how proven McCarthy and Thompson were and that he couldn't understand why people weren't giving them the benefit of the doubt. That they knew football and they were convinced Rodgers was the guy. The guy saying this had played for Chicago.The other host laughed and said "you guys had smart people that were convinced Cade McNown was the guy."

I love when the pro-Favre people argue how Rodgers dropped to the 24th pick in the draft (therefore, he must suck)... Skip Bayless, for one, used this stupid arguement on 1st & 10 a few days ago. Have these people bothered to look and see where Brett was drafted?

What does this have to do with my post?J

 

[T Bell]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I can see this. It's just a vibe, but I don't feel like he has much interest in Tampa or NY or anywhere else really.J

Anywhere else, except Minnesota that is. Let's not let St. Brett off the hook too easily.

I don't think his heart is in playing for MIN or CHI either. That's my gut feel. I think Mooch knows him pretty well. And he seemed pretty adamant that Green Bay was where he wanted to be. Again, one of them could be lying.J

Well, what about all of these reports from Favre about him "just wanting to play football", whether it be in Green Bay or elsewhere, and the strong indications that if it couldn't be for the Packers, it would be for the Vikings? What about all those phone calls to the Vikings? I think the truth for Brett is "evolving" as he goes along.

 

[Jimmy James]

Are you a Green Bay fan? If so, you're sounding as foolish as many of your bretheren were saying Ted Thompson was for being "spiteful" towards Favre at the expense of the team.

I'm a Dolphins fan with no stake in this at all. I just don't buy the team's line here. If Favre is so bad he doesn't have a place on the team as its starter, they have no business caring where he goes. If they can get a pick out of the Vikings, bravo. If not, cut the man loose. If I were him, I'd absolutely eat a roster spot and cause as much trouble for the team as I possibly could. I don't care what he put the team through -- the team is crazy to be treating the closest thing they have to a legend as you'll find in the NFL the way they are.

 

[Raider Nation]

Mort: "Favre has spoken with both teams (Bucs/Jets) today."

 

[gorf]

does anyone think green bay is really willing to pay favre $12 million to be the backup? that point seems to have been lost in all of this. assuming favre says, yeah sure, i'll be the backup, do they really keep him on the roster?

 

[Raider Nation]

Another interesting point on NFL radio tonight.One of the hosts was talking about how proven McCarthy and Thompson were and that he couldn't understand why people weren't giving them the benefit of the doubt. That they knew football and they were convinced Rodgers was the guy. The guy saying this had played for Chicago.The other host laughed and said "you guys had smart people that were convinced Cade McNown was the guy."

I love when the pro-Favre people argue how Rodgers dropped to the 24th pick in the draft (therefore, he must suck)... Skip Bayless, for one, used this stupid arguement on 1st & 10 a few days ago. Have these people bothered to look and see where Brett was drafted?

What does this have to do with my post?

Nothing, I guess. I've been trying to crowbar it in all day.

 

[Jimmy James]

does anyone think green bay is really willing to pay favre $12 million to be the backup? that point seems to have been lost in all of this. assuming favre says, yeah sure, i'll be the backup, do they really keep him on the roster?

I think it's starting to become clear that the answer to this is no. If he sticks around, I expect the rumor of him being limited to solo workouts and cut the day prior to the season starting may just come true.

 

[gorf]

Another interesting point on NFL radio tonight.One of the hosts was talking about how proven McCarthy and Thompson were and that he couldn't understand why people weren't giving them the benefit of the doubt. That they knew football and they were convinced Rodgers was the guy. The guy saying this had played for Chicago.The other host laughed and said "you guys had smart people that were convinced Cade McNown was the guy."

I love when the pro-Favre people argue how Rodgers dropped to the 24th pick in the draft (therefore, he must suck)... Skip Bayless, for one, used this stupid arguement on 1st & 10 a few days ago. Have these people bothered to look and see where Brett was drafted?

What does this have to do with my post?

Nothing, I guess. I've been trying to crowbar it in all day.

 

[Texican]

does anyone think green bay is really willing to pay favre $12 million to be the backup? that point seems to have been lost in all of this. assuming favre says, yeah sure, i'll be the backup, do they really keep him on the roster?

They were offering to pay $25mil to not come back

 

[Raider Nation]

Anyone notice that McCarthy sounds exactly like Dan Marino???

LINK

They are both from western Pennsylvania, so that's one reason.

 

[VTjkru]

Question, and pardon my ignorance, but why is it a given that Rogers would walk after his contract if Favre were to come back for a year or two. He has to know that when Favre retires (and it cant be that far down the road) that he will most likely be given the starting nod with a system he is ultra familiar with.

 

[T Bell]

Are you a Green Bay fan? If so, you're sounding as foolish as many of your bretheren were saying Ted Thompson was for being "spiteful" towards Favre at the expense of the team.

I'm a Dolphins fan with no stake in this at all. I just don't buy the team's line here. If Favre is so bad he doesn't have a place on the team as its starter, they have no business caring where he goes. If they can get a pick out of the Vikings, bravo. If not, cut the man loose. If I were him, I'd absolutely eat a roster spot and cause as much trouble for the team as I possibly could. I don't care what he put the team through -- the team is crazy to be treating the closest thing they have to a legend as you'll find in the NFL the way they are.

He could have occupied that roster spot all along. As I said previously, that was both the "adult" thing to do, and it was also the strongest play against the Packers because they'd either have to open up competition for the starting QB job, or trade or release him. He opted to use this as a weapon against Thompson, and his ineptitude in playing that political game has caused a lot of blowback for him. What's a team to do when their "legend" behaves this way and maximizes distraction while continuously sending mixed signals and whining about how he's not wanted? He's made Dan Marino look graceful in retirement, and that's saying something!

 

[Eric Stratton]

I am just wondering what the reasoning was for not allowing Favre on the field during the scrimage game, or in the locker room afterwards.If he was truely welcome back to the team why not allow him at least in the locker room around the players after the game.

He was not a member of the Green Bay Packers at that point.Why should he be allowed on the field?He claims to not want to be a distraction but shows up during family night and might have wanted to be on the field?Really?

Not a member of the team, all that was left was putting him on the roster....if you were welcoming back into the Packer family then welcome him back. The scrimmage was as much for the fans if not more then the players. Even if you didn't want him on the field, to let him down in the locker room after the game to allow him to feel a part of this team would of sufficed. On another note....on ESPN news....Bill Micheals of WTMJ in Milwaukee is reporting that Favre is supposed to be headed back to Mississippi, that he is done, he wanted to play for the Packers and really has no interest in going to another team. No link just heard it on the ESPNEWS. Note Michaels is saying he is getting his info from a person close to the situation. Could be a rumor.

I can see this. It's just a vibe, but I don't feel like he has much interest in Tampa or NY or anywhere else really.J

Anywhere else, except Minnesota that is. Let's not let St. Brett off the hook too easily.

I don't think his heart is in playing for MIN or CHI either. That's my gut feel. I think Mooch knows him pretty well. And he seemed pretty adamant that Green Bay was where he wanted to be. Again, one of them could be lying.J

Well, what about all of these reports from Favre about him "just wanting to play football", whether it be in Green Bay or elsewhere, and the strong indications that if it couldn't be for the Packers, it would be for the Vikings? What about all those phone calls to the Vikings? I think the truth for Brett is "evolving" as he goes along.

I think Brett is telling the truth that he only wants to play for Green Bay. I think he is having a hard time trying to understand why TT and McCarthy don't want him back.

 

[gorf]

does anyone think green bay is really willing to pay favre $12 million to be the backup? that point seems to have been lost in all of this. assuming favre says, yeah sure, i'll be the backup, do they really keep him on the roster?

I think it's starting to become clear that the answer to this is no. If he sticks around, I expect the rumor of him being limited to solo workouts and cut the day prior to the season starting may just come true.

i think that's right. if favre really wants to play football this year (and i don't necessarily mean for the packers, because he can't really control that), he should call their bluff, do what they tell him to do, smile for the camera, and wait to be released. if they don't release him, hey, it's $12 million, and he gets more "good guy" credit that will translate into more (non-football) opportunities down the road. and heck, he can do it again next year if he wants (although at that point, there's less likelihood of another team wanting to pick him up if/when he gets cut).

 

[gorf]

does anyone think green bay is really willing to pay favre $12 million to be the backup? that point seems to have been lost in all of this. assuming favre says, yeah sure, i'll be the backup, do they really keep him on the roster?

They were offering to pay $25mil to not come back

yeah, over ten years, though. plus that buys them a way out of (some of) the media scrutiny. paying him $12 million to sit on the bench would have the opposite effect.

 

[Jimmy James]

does anyone think green bay is really willing to pay favre $12 million to be the backup? that point seems to have been lost in all of this. assuming favre says, yeah sure, i'll be the backup, do they really keep him on the roster?

I think it's starting to become clear that the answer to this is no. If he sticks around, I expect the rumor of him being limited to solo workouts and cut the day prior to the season starting may just come true.

i think that's right. if favre really wants to play football this year (and i don't necessarily mean for the packers, because he can't really control that), he should call their bluff, do what they tell him to do, smile for the camera, and wait to be released. if they don't release him, hey, it's $12 million, and he gets more "good guy" credit that will translate into more (non-football) opportunities down the road. and heck, he can do it again next year if he wants (although at that point, there's less likelihood of another team wanting to pick him up if/when he gets cut).

They quite simply cannot start the season with Favre on the roster. Every time Rodgers strings together two incomplete passes, the crowd, the players, or some analyst will bring up Favre. Having Favre on the roster is an invitation to squander this season.