Farve to Report this Weekend (1 Viewer)

[NoFBinLA]

I read in another thread that Favre just wants a release so he is 100% in control of where he goes (like Minny, where he probably won't get traded).

He might fear that if he gives a list of teams, that he will be traded right away instead of released.

Stupid, but it sort of makes sense.

It still strikes me as incredibly selfish or arrogant that he thinks he can force a release so he can play potentially in the division. If I were he, I would be working with TT closely to figure out where he can go so he can play in a decent situation - rather than just sit at home and make the process slow.

What should he do? They basically want to deny him any right to play this year unless it's under THEIR terms.What would you do?

He's UNDER CONTRACT. He can only play on their terms.What is unclear about that? Why should he get to say 'I know it would be a bad idea for you to let me play for another team in our division but I really want to...'? Why should the team bow to him? Why is he more special than say, the left tackle? Because he's Brett Favre?

I don't get you guys at all. He has made his choice - repeatedly - and the choices he makes are nothing but self serving and myopic. He's like my pre-schooler - he wants what he wants when he wants it and if he doesn't get it, he just keeps asking or pushing in the hopes he'll get it anyway. Doesn't work for my kid, shouldn't work for Favre.

What would I do? Quit (stay retired) or play out my contract then move on. THOSE ARE HIS CHOICES.

He doesn't get to dictate to his employer - that's not how it works.

The Packers tried to give him a shot - He retired. He wanted to come back in March. They welcomed him by all accounts. He flip flopped again! And here we are.

But now he's being wronged?

Tell me - are you honestly saying that the Pack should release him - even if itmeans he plays against them - just because he is Brett Favre?

Do you really believe that? How does that makes sense at all?

Exactly, but they won't let him play with their team.Yes he is now being wronged. He's UNDER CONTRACT, so he should be allowed to compete for the job, and if not they should let him play elsewhere.

I have come a full 360 on this. Favre caused this, he did. The Packers handled it the way they should have, in the beginning...... But now Thompson has totally dropped the ball. Favre said he would come in and compete, that's the best you could hope for. But nooooo, TT said no way to that. Not only is that ignorant but it just shows you how big of an EGO TT really has. I as a Packer fan want the best damn QB out there on opening day, I don't care who it is. TT doesn't want that, he wants HIS guy in there. That's total BS.

This might very well be what takes TT down. It's a total lack of leadership. If Ron Wolf was there, no chance this cluster..... happens.

When did TT tell him he couldn't compete? Didn't the Pack say that exact thing a week ago? That Favre would compete for the job - and then a whole lot of folks in the SP came and said he shouldn't have to compete?But I ask again - do you really think it makes sense for the Pack to just release him? In what way does that make strategic sense?

If you're just saying he's the better QB and should be the guy in camp - I can see THAT argument - but it sounded like you were saying he deserves his release. And I apologize if that is not the case, but if it is, I still want someone to explain to me how that makes practical, business or strategic sense when he is clearly itching to play in the division?

 

[ScottyFargo]

I read in another thread that Favre just wants a release so he is 100% in control of where he goes (like Minny, where he probably won't get traded).

He might fear that if he gives a list of teams, that he will be traded right away instead of released.

Stupid, but it sort of makes sense.

It still strikes me as incredibly selfish or arrogant that he thinks he can force a release so he can play potentially in the division. If I were he, I would be working with TT closely to figure out where he can go so he can play in a decent situation - rather than just sit at home and make the process slow.

What should he do? They basically want to deny him any right to play this year unless it's under THEIR terms.What would you do?

He's UNDER CONTRACT. He can only play on their terms.What is unclear about that? Why should he get to say 'I know it would be a bad idea for you to let me play for another team in our division but I really want to...'? Why should the team bow to him? Why is he more special than say, the left tackle? Because he's Brett Favre?

I don't get you guys at all. He has made his choice - repeatedly - and the choices he makes are nothing but self serving and myopic. He's like my pre-schooler - he wants what he wants when he wants it and if he doesn't get it, he just keeps asking or pushing in the hopes he'll get it anyway. Doesn't work for my kid, shouldn't work for Favre.

What would I do? Quit (stay retired) or play out my contract then move on. THOSE ARE HIS CHOICES.

He doesn't get to dictate to his employer - that's not how it works.

The Packers tried to give him a shot - He retired. He wanted to come back in March. They welcomed him by all accounts. He flip flopped again! And here we are.

But now he's being wronged?

Tell me - are you honestly saying that the Pack should release him - even if itmeans he plays against them - just because he is Brett Favre?

Do you really believe that? How does that makes sense at all?

Exactly, but they won't let him play with their team.Yes he is now being wronged. He's UNDER CONTRACT, so he should be allowed to compete for the job, and if not they should let him play elsewhere.

I have come a full 360 on this. Favre caused this, he did. The Packers handled it the way they should have, in the beginning...... But now Thompson has totally dropped the ball. Favre said he would come in and compete, that's the best you could hope for. But nooooo, TT said no way to that. Not only is that ignorant but it just shows you how big of an EGO TT really has. I as a Packer fan want the best damn QB out there on opening day, I don't care who it is. TT doesn't want that, he wants HIS guy in there. That's total BS.

This might very well be what takes TT down. It's a total lack of leadership. If Ron Wolf was there, no chance this cluster..... happens.

For all you, "he's under contract" people, if you really felt that way you would be clamoring for him to be given back the starting job. We all know why that isn't going to happen. When Brett Favre signed that contract, he didn't sign it expecting to be the backup QB pulling in $12 million dollars in what could be his last year of playing. He wants to play while he still can, and Green Bay is no longer affording him that opportunity. I think he's being pretty selfish, as usual for Brett Favre, however who else should he be thinking about when he's being forced back into retirement that he doesn't want any part of now?

He's selfish, but obviously the Packers are being selfish AND petty over this whole ordeal.

 

[gruecd]

I as a Packer fan want the best damn QB out there on opening day, I don't care who it is. TT doesn't want that, he wants HIS guy in there. That's total BS.

I agree with this 100%. And for those of you (Ted) who are convinced that Rodgers is that guy (for whatever reason is beyond me), then let's find out. Put them both on the field, and let's see what happens. I'm pretty sure I remember an interview during the offseason (after they signed Chillar, I believe) where either McCarthy or TT was talking about how the team benefits from having people compete for positions. Except at QB, I guess.....

 

[NoFBinLA]

I will again voice my opinion that Favre is (likely) better QB, more than likely the better person to get them to the Stupor Bowl and would probably tear up a QB competition. None of that is definite - but it seems likely.

My only sticking point seems to be this insistence on being released to play for a division rival.

I'll be back - I am having an earthquake and need to check that nothign fell.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Thompson specifically addressed these issues yesterday - transcript excerpts below. He has not publicly explained in detail why the coaches and management made these decisions, but knowing what (little) I know about this guy, I am certain he has the team's best interests in mind.

(Does the organization even want Brett back?)There are a lot of different scenarios and Brett and I talked about that. That's one scenario, where he comes back. We've said all along, we've never changed our message in this regard, that with his retirement and subsequent affirmation of that retirement, we have made a commitment to move forward. He understands that. I'm not saying he's in total agreement, but as a football guy, he understands that, and that's where we are. What does that mean? Does that mean he comes back in a different role or something like that? That would just be determined as we go forward.(Does him coming back represent not moving forward?)I'm just saying, him coming back, we have to prepare our team. Come draft time, we decided we had to get this position ready, so we have three young quarterbacks that we have to prepare to play. Now how Brett factors into that group? We would just have to wait and see. We wouldn't know. Time marches on, things happen, but there are scenarios where he would be here and he would be fine.(Why not have a competition if he comes back?)Again, I thought it was important for me to be perfectly honest with Brett that we have started down this path and it doesn't make sense for us to turn around and go back now. We have to continue down this path. Where that leads, I don't know, but I didn't want to be dishonest or disingenuous and say OK, we can do this and then change our mind. I think Brett Favre deserves more than that, so we told him the way we felt.(But why do you have to continue down this path? Why not let him back and say the best quarterback wins?)We believe that this is the path that we should be on. We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term.(If you say he deserves better than that, why not give him what he wants?)The club has certain rights in this too. We've told Brett that we would work with him and obviously it would have to be an in-tandem thing to work out any sort of trade or whatever. But to just offer a blanket release just relinquishing all of the club's rights to me doesn't make good business sense.

 

[T Man]

I as a Packer fan want the best damn QB out there on opening day, I don't care who it is. TT doesn't want that, he wants HIS guy in there. That's total BS.

I agree with this 100%. And for those of you (Ted) who are convinced that Rodgers is that guy (for whatever reason is beyond me), then let's find out. Put them both on the field, and let's see what happens. I'm pretty sure I remember an interview during the offseason (after they signed Chillar, I believe) where either McCarthy or TT was talking about how the team benefits from having people compete for positions. Except at QB, I guess.....

This is overly simplistic. Is the best player week 1 the best player for the overall health of the franchise? Not always. A GM cannot just think about week 1, he should be thinking for the whole year, and the next. Many times a younger player is kept that might not be the best right now, but is the best option for the team in the long run. For example (not a great one, but an example), after a very good year the Bengals decided to demote Jon Kitna in favor of Carston Palmer. They did not know what they had in Palmer, but they knew it was time to give him a shot for the long term.As for competition, I originally thought that this was the best; however, I now believe that this would probably never workl. Would the competition be fair? Everyone says that TT and the coaching staff would not be fair, but would the media and the fan base? Favre is a legend. Rogers would have to be far superior and mistake free to even come close to winning the fan support and media support - especially if Favre were on the same team. Let's face it, a Rodgers interception would be viewed much differently then a Favre interception. Would Favre be under the same scrutiny? How can you compete with a legend?

And if Rogers was better, would Favre acknowledge it and be the good little soldier and support him - or would he ultimately be divisive. Would he retire immediately? And if so, then Brohm, Flynn and Rodgers would have in effect lost valuable reps during training camp. THis needs to be thought through.

I wonder what the Packer fans would be saying if the Pack had picked up a large priced FA QB or traded for a QB. If there was a large expenditure and then Favre did this, would everyone bash TT for moving on? Rodgers is in the 2nd to last year of his contract. He has apparently shown the coaching staff he can play, but without getting the opportunity they will never know. So once Favre decided to stay retired, they threw all their eggs in the Aaron Rogers basket.

The 49ers decided it was time to "move on" from Montana to Young. Montana wanted to play still. The 49ers did not "open" a competition, instead they wanted him to retire. I don't recall Montana going on a news channel and calling his boss a liar, and essentially a scum bag. I don't remember him demanding to be released with no strings attached. I don't recall him talking to the Falcons, Saints, Rams about being their starting QB. But he wanted to play. He ultimately gave the 49ers a list of teams to which he would be traded and played two years. IIRC he garnered a 1st round pick. There were some issues, but I don't remembere the circus that the Favre situation is causing.

It is too simple to say let him come back. And it is too simple to say release him. This is much more complicated, and even a trade is not a great option -- it just appears to be the best option.

So why doesn't Favre just give them a list of teams? He wants to play and understands the Pack wants to move on. (is it really because he is afraid the Packers will trade him to one of the teams on his list? How horrible!)

 

[Phurfur]

Brett Favre is playing all of you and the media like a fiddle.

 

[GreenNGold]

Ted Thompson is playing all of you and the media like a fiddle.

FYP

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Thompson specifically addressed these issues yesterday - transcript excerpts below. He has not publicly explained in detail why the coaches and management made these decisions, but knowing what (little) I know about this guy, I am certain he has the team's best interests in mind.

(Does the organization even want Brett back?)There are a lot of different scenarios and Brett and I talked about that. That's one scenario, where he comes back. We've said all along, we've never changed our message in this regard, that with his retirement and subsequent affirmation of that retirement, we have made a commitment to move forward. He understands that. I'm not saying he's in total agreement, but as a football guy, he understands that, and that's where we are. What does that mean? Does that mean he comes back in a different role or something like that? That would just be determined as we go forward.(Does him coming back represent not moving forward?)I'm just saying, him coming back, we have to prepare our team. Come draft time, we decided we had to get this position ready, so we have three young quarterbacks that we have to prepare to play. Now how Brett factors into that group? We would just have to wait and see. We wouldn't know. Time marches on, things happen, but there are scenarios where he would be here and he would be fine.(Why not have a competition if he comes back?)Again, I thought it was important for me to be perfectly honest with Brett that we have started down this path and it doesn't make sense for us to turn around and go back now. We have to continue down this path. Where that leads, I don't know, but I didn't want to be dishonest or disingenuous and say OK, we can do this and then change our mind. I think Brett Favre deserves more than that, so we told him the way we felt.(But why do you have to continue down this path? Why not let him back and say the best quarterback wins?)We believe that this is the path that we should be on. We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term.(If you say he deserves better than that, why not give him what he wants?)The club has certain rights in this too. We've told Brett that we would work with him and obviously it would have to be an in-tandem thing to work out any sort of trade or whatever. But to just offer a blanket release just relinquishing all of the club's rights to me doesn't make good business sense.

Those quotes confirm exactly what some of us have said all along: Favre was told there would be no competition. He would be the backup. So please stop using this argument that he doesn't want there to be a competition; that he just wants to be named the starter. Thompson clearly says there (unless your name is Christo) that there will be no competition. So now you're saying that this guy who was a couple of plays away from going to the SB last year and has an amazing Games Played streak, should come back and be the backup without any competition? Really?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I read in another thread that Favre just wants a release so he is 100% in control of where he goes (like Minny, where he probably won't get traded).

He might fear that if he gives a list of teams, that he will be traded right away instead of released.

Stupid, but it sort of makes sense.

It still strikes me as incredibly selfish or arrogant that he thinks he can force a release so he can play potentially in the division. If I were he, I would be working with TT closely to figure out where he can go so he can play in a decent situation - rather than just sit at home and make the process slow.

What should he do? They basically want to deny him any right to play this year unless it's under THEIR terms.What would you do?

He's UNDER CONTRACT. He can only play on their terms.What is unclear about that? Why should he get to say 'I know it would be a bad idea for you to let me play for another team in our division but I really want to...'? Why should the team bow to him? Why is he more special than say, the left tackle? Because he's Brett Favre?

I don't get you guys at all. He has made his choice - repeatedly - and the choices he makes are nothing but self serving and myopic. He's like my pre-schooler - he wants what he wants when he wants it and if he doesn't get it, he just keeps asking or pushing in the hopes he'll get it anyway. Doesn't work for my kid, shouldn't work for Favre.

What would I do? Quit (stay retired) or play out my contract then move on. THOSE ARE HIS CHOICES.

He doesn't get to dictate to his employer - that's not how it works.

The Packers tried to give him a shot - He retired. He wanted to come back in March. They welcomed him by all accounts. He flip flopped again! And here we are.

But now he's being wronged?

Tell me - are you honestly saying that the Pack should release him - even if itmeans he plays against them - just because he is Brett Favre?

Do you really believe that? How does that makes sense at all?

Exactly, but they won't let him play with their team.Yes he is now being wronged. He's UNDER CONTRACT, so he should be allowed to compete for the job, and if not they should let him play elsewhere.

I have come a full 360 on this. Favre caused this, he did. The Packers handled it the way they should have, in the beginning...... But now Thompson has totally dropped the ball. Favre said he would come in and compete, that's the best you could hope for. But nooooo, TT said no way to that. Not only is that ignorant but it just shows you how big of an EGO TT really has. I as a Packer fan want the best damn QB out there on opening day, I don't care who it is. TT doesn't want that, he wants HIS guy in there. That's total BS.

This might very well be what takes TT down. It's a total lack of leadership. If Ron Wolf was there, no chance this cluster..... happens.

When did TT tell him he couldn't compete? Didn't the Pack say that exact thing a week ago? That Favre would compete for the job - and then a whole lot of folks in the SP came and said he shouldn't have to compete?But I ask again - do you really think it makes sense for the Pack to just release him? In what way does that make strategic sense?

If you're just saying he's the better QB and should be the guy in camp - I can see THAT argument - but it sounded like you were saying he deserves his release. And I apologize if that is not the case, but if it is, I still want someone to explain to me how that makes practical, business or strategic sense when he is clearly itching to play in the division?

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

 

[NoFBinLA]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

 

[Franknbeans]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

 

[datonn]

Exactly, but they won't let him play with their team.

Yes he is now being wronged. He's UNDER CONTRACT, so he should be allowed to compete for the job, and if not they should let him play elsewhere.

I have come a full 360 on this. Favre caused this, he did. The Packers handled it the way they should have, in the beginning...... But now Thompson has totally dropped the ball. Favre said he would come in and compete, that's the best you could hope for. But nooooo, TT said no way to that. Not only is that ignorant but it just shows you how big of an EGO TT really has. I as a Packer fan want the best damn QB out there on opening day, I don't care who it is. TT doesn't want that, he wants HIS guy in there. That's total BS.

This might very well be what takes TT down. It's a total lack of leadership. If Ron Wolf was there, no chance this cluster..... happens.

It's the 25-year old boss walking into a situation where he's got two head-strong 50-something direct reports who have been doing it the same way since before "he" was born, and now "he" is asking them to doing a complete 180 and do things an entirely different way...only to have the two 50-somethings say "#### that, you ignorant, arrogant little punk!" But NOT that I speak from past experience or anything... :whoosh: Seriously though, I think it's a TOTAL power-struggle. Thompson came in and shook things up and Favre didn't like it. Favre also (I think I heard) didn't think McCarthy was the best choice out there related to new head coaches, but McCarthy was hired anyway. The team is moving forward, and Favre wanted to keep a good thing rolling. Change sucks, and Favre hung himself with the Packers for his off-the-field actions the past two off-seasons. That said, he's STILL Brett Favre, and for the team to basically say it's Rodgers' job without even so much as a competition in Training Camp is pretty amazing now that Favre has said he wants to play. Rodgers can't do much worse in the INT department, but he'll hold a tiny candle to Favre's toughness, leadership and his refusal to allow the team to lose on two-minute drive after two-minute drive.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

 

[T Bell]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

The compromise is that Favre can give Thompson a list of teams outside of the NFC North (if not outside of the NFC entirely) that he'd be willing to play for, and let Thompson work a deal. Favre's not done that, which makes me question what his true motives are here.

 

[MCguidance]

Favre sent in his letter of reinstatement as per Mort on ESPN right now on NFL Live.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

The compromise is that Favre can give Thompson a list of teams outside of the NFC North (if not outside of the NFC entirely) that he'd be willing to play for, and let Thompson work a deal. Favre's not done that, which makes me question what his true motives are here.

Well, I think it's obvious that his true motives are to be traded to the team where he has the best chance of winning the Super Bowl and that team is Minnesota, unfortunately. Of the top 8 teams in the AFC, which one would need/want Favre?

 

[T Bell]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

The compromise is that Favre can give Thompson a list of teams outside of the NFC North (if not outside of the NFC entirely) that he'd be willing to play for, and let Thompson work a deal. Favre's not done that, which makes me question what his true motives are here.

Well, I think it's obvious that his true motives are to be traded to the team where he has the best chance of winning the Super Bowl and that team is Minnesota, unfortunately. Of the top 8 teams in the AFC, which one would need/want Favre?

None of the top teams would, but how about a borderline team like Tennessee or Houston, or the Bills? I could also see Baltimore or KC being in the playoff mix with him at QB.

 

[GreenNGold]

Favre sent in his letter of reinstatement as per Mort on ESPN right now on NFL Live.

Good!!! What is next on the list for all the hater's to start complaining about?

 

[Phurfur]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

The compromise is that Favre can give Thompson a list of teams outside of the NFC North (if not outside of the NFC entirely) that he'd be willing to play for, and let Thompson work a deal. Favre's not done that, which makes me question what his true motives are here.

Well, I think it's obvious that his true motives are to be traded to the team where he has the best chance of winning the Super Bowl and that team is Minnesota, unfortunately. Of the top 8 teams in the AFC, which one would need/want Favre?

or GB, too bad he retired.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

 

[T Bell]

Favre sent in his letter of reinstatement as per Mort on ESPN right now on NFL Live.

Good!!! What is next on the list for all the hater's to start complaining about?

Hard to say, fanboy, we're going to be discussing that during our meeting in our smoke-filled room this afternoon.

 

[GreenNGold]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

The compromise is that Favre can give Thompson a list of teams outside of the NFC North (if not outside of the NFC entirely) that he'd be willing to play for, and let Thompson work a deal. Favre's not done that, which makes me question what his true motives are here.

Well, I think it's obvious that his true motives are to be traded to the team where he has the best chance of winning the Super Bowl and that team is Minnesota, unfortunately. Of the top 8 teams in the AFC, which one would need/want Favre?

None of the top teams would, but how about a borderline team like Tennessee or Houston, or the Bills? I could also see Baltimore or KC being in the playoff mix with him at QB.

I disagree about BAL and KC and KC is going young anyway. Makes little sense. I'm not sure that TEN or HOU would want to stunt Young and Schaub's growth. Maybe the Bills, but I'm just not sure that they are a Favre away. I know some people expect them to fall back some this year. Basically, what you (and I don't mean you in particular) are asking for is either for Favre to come back as the backup for the Packers, regardless of how he plays in camp. Or for him to end his career on a middle of the road team. I just don't see it as being fair, and yes I understand life isn't fair and this is a business. But I can see him balking at those two options. If he really balked at a trade to TB and Gruden really wanted him, I'd blame him a little bit. But I just don't see why if he wants to play, he should be relegated to being declared the backup with no competition or go to some crappy team.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Favre sent in his letter of reinstatement as per Mort on ESPN right now on NFL Live.

Good!!! What is next on the list for all the hater's to start complaining about?

Hard to say, fanboy, we're going to be discussing that during our meeting in our smoke-filled room this afternoon.

LOL, all these new developments ruining your case, huh?

 

[ScottyFargo]

Favre sent in his letter of reinstatement as per Mort on ESPN right now on NFL Live.

And Green Bay instantly begs for more time. I really, really hope he doesn't relent. He already put off turning i the papers at Green Bay's request long enough. Now it's time to turn the screws on 'em. You want him as a backup? We'll see how long that lasts.The countdown to the release has started...

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

I've been preparing for a few years now, and took the final mental step when Favre gave his entirely sincere and convincing performance last March. All good things must come to an end. I am excited for the future (as I was every Fall in the 70's and 80's). At least we won't have to suffer all the bandwagon-hopping, cheesehead-wearing face-painters who have taken over at Lambeau the past 10 years.

 

[Phurfur]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

Oh, don't be so dramatic! Favre is washed up, why do you think no one is interested in him. Hello? Favre has had 10 years to win another SB and couldn't do it, why is this year different? GB has been stuck in limbo long enough with this guy. Time to move on.And no I am not a "hater" I own 2 Farve Jerseys (home and away) and have seen every pass he has thrown in GB. I just know when to put the jersey away.

 

[T Bell]

Favre sent in his letter of reinstatement as per Mort on ESPN right now on NFL Live.

Good!!! What is next on the list for all the hater's to start complaining about?

Hard to say, fanboy, we're going to be discussing that during our meeting in our smoke-filled room this afternoon.

LOL, all these new developments ruining your case, huh?

Nope, not even close. I'm just amused at the desperation of Favre's blind supporters to find something definitive to "prove" that they're "right" about him. Carry on.

 

[datonn]

I've been preparing for a few years now, and took the final mental step when Favre gave his entirely sincere and convincing performance last March. All good things must come to an end. I am excited for the future (as I was every Fall in the 70's and 80's). At least we won't have to suffer all the bandwagon-hopping, cheesehead-wearing face-painters who have taken over at Lambeau the past 10 years.

The only thing that sucks though is the substantial drop in local/national interest after all those horn-wearing, er, cheesehead-wearing casual fans go away. Been there, done that. Copyright: Kneel-Down Denny on January 17, 1999.

 

[Phurfur]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

I've been preparing for a few years now, and took the final mental step when Favre gave his entirely sincere and convincing performance last March. All good things must come to an end. I am excited for the future (as I was every Fall in the 70's and 80's). At least we won't have to suffer all the bandwagon-hopping, cheesehead-wearing face-painters who have taken over at Lambeau the past 10 years.

Nice! I agree.

 

[Aaronstory]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

Because he's been trying to get out of Green Bay since before last season but keeps saying "Oh I'm a Packer, it's a special place, I don't ever want to play anywhere else" all while demanding to be traded after Thompson didn't trade for Moss and then retiring in March but then his agent is sniffing around the Vikings in April, and then in June he tells McCarthy he only wants to come back as a Packer, then tells the media/public he wants a release.Give me a freekin' break already.

 

[obxlegends]

(KFFL) ESPNews reports retired QB Brett Favre faxed his reinstatement application to the commissioner's office Tuesday, July 29.

 

[T Bell]

Did you see the quotes from TT's press conference? He told Favre he couldn't compete.

Yes, I just saw them posted after I wrote that. He didn't say it in so many words, but you are right - it's there. Definitely not somethign I agree with, though I can see what he thinks he is doing.My question still remains - and nobody can answer it: Do people really think the Pack should just release Favre? And if so, why?Both sides (TT and BF) are really making a butchery of this problem. There has to be some way both sides can get some of what they want....

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

The compromise is that Favre can give Thompson a list of teams outside of the NFC North (if not outside of the NFC entirely) that he'd be willing to play for, and let Thompson work a deal. Favre's not done that, which makes me question what his true motives are here.

Well, I think it's obvious that his true motives are to be traded to the team where he has the best chance of winning the Super Bowl and that team is Minnesota, unfortunately. Of the top 8 teams in the AFC, which one would need/want Favre?

None of the top teams would, but how about a borderline team like Tennessee or Houston, or the Bills? I could also see Baltimore or KC being in the playoff mix with him at QB.

I disagree about BAL and KC and KC is going young anyway. Makes little sense. I'm not sure that TEN or HOU would want to stunt Young and Schaub's growth. Maybe the Bills, but I'm just not sure that they are a Favre away. I know some people expect them to fall back some this year. Basically, what you (and I don't mean you in particular) are asking for is either for Favre to come back as the backup for the Packers, regardless of how he plays in camp. Or for him to end his career on a middle of the road team. I just don't see it as being fair, and yes I understand life isn't fair and this is a business. But I can see him balking at those two options. If he really balked at a trade to TB and Gruden really wanted him, I'd blame him a little bit. But I just don't see why if he wants to play, he should be relegated to being declared the backup with no competition or go to some crappy team.

I thought I'd heard someone report that Favre had ruled out a trade to Tampa. Anyway, yeah, life is unfair, though the "unfair" label in this particular instance is quite amusing given that all but a handful of QB's in NFL history would trade their careers for Favre's in Green Bay in a heartbeat. It's also unfair to the team to have paid him well and secured his rights, planned around his retirement, only to have him reverse course and insist that he gets to end up with a division rival poised to overtake the Packers in the division if they shore up their QB position. Moreover, Favre is a guy who in the past has criticized other players for putting their interests ahead of the team's. It seems that "unfair" is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[GreenNGold]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

Oh, don't be so dramatic! Favre is washed up, why do you think no one is interested in him. Hello? Favre has had 10 years to win another SB and couldn't do it, why is this year different? GB has been stuck in limbo long enough with this guy. Time to move on.And no I am not a "hater" I own 2 Farve Jerseys (home and away) and have seen every pass he has thrown in GB. I just know when to put the jersey away.

washed up is 4155 passing yards for 28 TD's and 15 INT's?

 

[NoFBinLA]

But that's just it Andrew: They can't. Brett Favre wants to come back and start at QB for a team with a good chance at the Super Bowl, like the Packers. Or maybe the Vikings. Most of the other SB contending teams have no need for Favre. Most of the non-SB contending teams have no reason to trade for him since they are building up with youth. Ted Thompson wants Aaron Rodgers to be the Packers starting QB in 2008. He will not allow Favre to go to Minnesota. Period. So where do you see any compromise there? I'd say that Favre could compromise by accepting a trade to Tampa. Thompson can compromise by allowing an honest QB competition in Packers training camp. Which one will happen first? And do the Bucs even want Favre? And if they do, will Thompson trade him for a reasonable price? Or will he just make a sham effort?Edit to add: I see both sides being at fault, but I just can't see how Favre is more at fault. In fact, when he said that TT told him he would only be a backup when he first called him a couple of weeks ago, I think most people here thought Favre was lying. Some have even said that and said he has lied or exaggerated other statements. But now Thompson pretty much admits that Favre can only be a backup. Which makes me lean toward Favre not lying quite as much as people think. So why is everyone so mad at Favre instead of Thompson?

this does seem to have become a real ego thing hasn't it. Favre won't back down, Thompson won't back down - maybe you can change both 'won'ts' to 'can't'. I would guess the only way to compromise are the two ways you outlined and both would cause a powerful ego to lose (or risk losing) face.RE: what Thompson wants - according to reports yesterday he says he was looking for a 3rd and a player. But I would think there are teams who might pay that. It's not like LaMont Jordan where you knew the Raiders had to release him. Green bay can't afford to - Favre to Minny is much worse than Jordan to <insert AFC West Team here>.I guess at this point my take is just this - if Favre really wants to play - and I believe he does and still can - why not work with the franchise for a trade that puts you in at least a good situation? Sure, TT could give in and welcoem him to camp and open the QB competition up - maybe he should. But Favre has complained more than once he doesn't feel wanted - so why stay in Green Bay if you feel so unloved? I bet both Buc and Jets fans would welcome him like a conquering hero if he showed up. Unless Favre just can't contemplate life as anything but a Packer. Which doesn't seem the case.Instead it seems like he's just sitting back waiting to be released which should never, ever happen. Not because TT is a jerk - but because it would be career suicide for anyone to allow Favre to go within the division, which it appears is what he wants (aside from his old job back).Maybe there is no compromise. Maybe it's mutually assured destruction.

 

[vitaflo]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

For the next 10 years, yes.

 

[T Bell]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

Oh, don't be so dramatic! Favre is washed up, why do you think no one is interested in him. Hello? Favre has had 10 years to win another SB and couldn't do it, why is this year different? GB has been stuck in limbo long enough with this guy. Time to move on.And no I am not a "hater" I own 2 Farve Jerseys (home and away) and have seen every pass he has thrown in GB. I just know when to put the jersey away.

washed up is 4155 passing yards for 28 TD's and 15 INT's?

I guess I'm confused - are they going to be replaying the 2007 season this year?

 

[NoFBinLA]

Favre sent in his letter of reinstatement as per Mort on ESPN right now on NFL Live.

Yay! I have assured discussion topics for my shows and blogs for the next week! :applause:See, now the rubber hits the road - the next 24hrs should be reeeeeaaaaal interesting.Maybe a trade has been worked out. Maybe Brett is forcing one. Maybe he is forcing a QB competition. Maybe Ted and him kissed and made up.Maybe he has secretly bought shares from all Packer holders and now owns the team and will play himself at QB!

 

[ScottyFargo]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

Oh, don't be so dramatic! Favre is washed up, why do you think no one is interested in him. Hello? Favre has had 10 years to win another SB and couldn't do it, why is this year different? GB has been stuck in limbo long enough with this guy. Time to move on.And no I am not a "hater" I own 2 Farve Jerseys (home and away) and have seen every pass he has thrown in GB. I just know when to put the jersey away.

Favre drank your milkshake.

 

[GreenNGold]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

Oh, don't be so dramatic! Favre is washed up, why do you think no one is interested in him. Hello? Favre has had 10 years to win another SB and couldn't do it, why is this year different? GB has been stuck in limbo long enough with this guy. Time to move on.And no I am not a "hater" I own 2 Farve Jerseys (home and away) and have seen every pass he has thrown in GB. I just know when to put the jersey away.

washed up is 4155 passing yards for 28 TD's and 15 INT's?

I guess I'm confused - are they going to be replaying the 2007 season this year?

I guess i'm confused -- since we are not replaying 2007, then Tom Brady and Peyton Manning must be washed up now as well.

 

[T Bell]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

Oh, don't be so dramatic! Favre is washed up, why do you think no one is interested in him. Hello? Favre has had 10 years to win another SB and couldn't do it, why is this year different? GB has been stuck in limbo long enough with this guy. Time to move on.And no I am not a "hater" I own 2 Farve Jerseys (home and away) and have seen every pass he has thrown in GB. I just know when to put the jersey away.

washed up is 4155 passing yards for 28 TD's and 15 INT's?

I guess I'm confused - are they going to be replaying the 2007 season this year?

I guess i'm confused -- since we are not replaying 2007, then Tom Brady and Peyton Manning must be washed up now as well.

You truly have a dizzying intellect.

 

[GreenNGold]

Does the Packer braintrust really believe Rodgers gives them a better chance to win than Favre?

I take that to be the case, when Thompson says, "We believe this is the best thing in the best interest of the organization, both in the short term and the long term." It appears he has the support of the coaches and the executive management. I personally am not terribly surprised that the coaching staff has determined it is time to move forward with Rodgers. This of course is the most reasonable explanation for their actions over the past four months. Obviously they can't simply release Favre, nor could they open the season with Favre on the Packer bench breaking his consecutive games streak on a Monday night. I think any form of open competition in training camp would be a circus, and not lead to any positive result. This isn't Grossman against Orton.I think Thompson is making the best of a very bad situation that is really the culmination of several years of frustration with Favre. According to today's paper, the Packers are not receiving any positive interest from the league on a trade, so they are really in a tough spot right now. I would guess they would be very happy with a conditional second day pick from any team outside the NFC North if Favre would agree to it. Personally, I would have no problem with Favre wearing the purple if the Packers got a first day pick out of it, just for appearances sake if nothing else. I'm still just enjoying the drama as a fan, but I think the point at which the team arguably begins suffering as a result of this ongoing saga is not too far off.

The team is suffering and will continue to suffer everyday until Brett Favre is back and named the starter. Get ready to live the 1970's and 1980's all over again if he is traded.

Oh, don't be so dramatic! Favre is washed up, why do you think no one is interested in him. Hello? Favre has had 10 years to win another SB and couldn't do it, why is this year different? GB has been stuck in limbo long enough with this guy. Time to move on.And no I am not a "hater" I own 2 Farve Jerseys (home and away) and have seen every pass he has thrown in GB. I just know when to put the jersey away.

washed up is 4155 passing yards for 28 TD's and 15 INT's?

I guess I'm confused - are they going to be replaying the 2007 season this year?

I guess i'm confused -- since we are not replaying 2007, then Tom Brady and Peyton Manning must be washed up now as well.

You truly have a dizzying intellect.

The team still has most of it's pieces in place, and in theory, the young team should be better with another year of experience under their belts. There is no reason to believe Favre couldn't have just as good of a season as last year (or better) if he is allowed to compete for the starting job. You know what your getting with Favre (should be pretty similar to last year), with Rodgers, you have no idea. Let them compete!If/when Favre starts to show signs of being "washed up", then bring in Rodgers.

 

[Golden Mike Tomczak]

I heard on ESPN he has signed his papers and turned them in.....What next?

 

[Mystery Achiever]

Favre sent in his letter of reinstatement as per Mort on ESPN right now on NFL Live

Yay! I have assured discussion topics for my shows and blogs for the next week! :applause:See, now the rubber hits the road - the next 24hrs should be reeeeeaaaaal interesting.Maybe a trade has been worked out. Maybe Brett is forcing one. Maybe he is forcing a QB competition. Maybe Ted and him kissed and made up.Maybe he has secretly bought shares from all Packer holders and now owns the team and will play himself at QB!

And this should be good for anothet ten pages in the thread. John Clayton has been saying since yesterday that Favre could end up in camp on Wednesday; this would track with the timeline to get him there.

 

[NoFBinLA]

I heard on ESPN he has signed his papers and turned them in.....What next?

I think the NFL reinstates him (timeframe:Idon'tknow) and he goes to camp forcing the Packers to a) trade him or b) open up a competition.I think you'll see something happen either way by end of week. Someone is goign to offer at least a 3rd rounder and a body for Favre. He doesn't have a no-trade clause, right? Can the Pack just trade him to the Jets or Bucs even if Favre isn't interested? And what happens then?

 

[pinequick]

I heard on ESPN he has signed his papers and turned them in.....What next?

I think the NFL reinstates him (timeframe:Idon'tknow) and he goes to camp forcing the Packers to a) trade him or b) open up a competition.I think you'll see something happen either way by end of week. Someone is goign to offer at least a 3rd rounder and a body for Favre.

He doesn't have a no-trade clause, right? Can the Pack just trade him to the Jets or Bucs even if Favre isn't interested? And what happens then?

Last I heard, the way that his contract is worded he DOES have right of refusal on trades.

 

[NoFBinLA]

I heard on ESPN he has signed his papers and turned them in.....What next?

I think the NFL reinstates him (timeframe:Idon'tknow) and he goes to camp forcing the Packers to a) trade him or b) open up a competition.I think you'll see something happen either way by end of week. Someone is goign to offer at least a 3rd rounder and a body for Favre.

He doesn't have a no-trade clause, right? Can the Pack just trade him to the Jets or Bucs even if Favre isn't interested? And what happens then?

Last I heard, the way that his contract is worded he DOES have right of refusal on trades.

Thanks - I have heard conflicting things on that front.Which pushes this from intriguing to veeeeeeeeeeeeeeerey intriguing....

 

[vitaflo]

FWIW, Favre was just removed from the homepage on packers.com.

 

[NoFBinLA]

FWIW, Favre was just removed from the homepage on packers.com.

Are we now onto the tickey-tackey phase of the slapfight?Will Favre now refer to the Packers as 'the old ex' or 'they-who-shall-not-be-named'?Had a friend who did that with his ex - used to make us laff.