Farve to Report this Weekend (1 Viewer)

[sho nuff]

Favre DID want to play in GB. Both Favre and McCarthy confirmed it. He was told he was not welcome "the team has moved on" has been echoed by Favre, McCarthy, and TT.Does he still? Probably not. But maybe as starteer (which he has earned repeatedly). I might not want to start for such ########s either.They should have asked for a 2 year committment in June when he first called and made him starteer again. The rest has been a circus easily avoided.

If you buy that, so be it. I don't.He's openly questioned the front office for the better part of three years. He demanded a trade last year when they didn't land Moss, then passed it off as just rumors. Then this.When you put it all together, it just doesn't appear to me to be a guy that wants to play in Green Bay. Or at least for Thompson.And honestly, if he would've just come out and said that instead of playing games, then this situation could've been avoided.Problem is, he's more interested in saving face than admitting what many of us know. He's wanted out for a long time. Long before this stuff happened.

The evidence does not support that. Favre, Thompson, and McCarthy have all agreed that when he called in June to say he wanted to come back and play with the Packers he was told "We have moved on".There is no question of this.Do start players try to influence GMs? Sure. Does this mean they do not want to play there? Not at all.

The evidence does indeed support that. Favre demanded a trade just last year. I know you all want to gloss over that and believe Favre's "It's just rumors" BS, but I don't buy his excuse on that one.And you're right, they did say they'd moved on. As they should've.Favre knew their timetable. And you can be damn sure he knew how they'd respond in June.This has been brewing for a long time. Anyone who thinks this just bubbled up now because Brett changed his mind is fooling themselves.

Actually, if Favre had demanded a trade he would have been traded or sat out.What he did was say he would like to be traded (once) if they were not going to try to win sooner rather than later.He then took it back.All evidence says he wanted to still play for the Packers. He said it, McCarthy said it, even Thompson said it.But yeah, Favre is no TT fan. But he was not "damn sure" what they would say in June. Sorry you cannot take him at his word, but at least take McCarthy and TT at theirs. There surely was a chance they would take him back, since they were willing to in late March when he said the same thing.

I think he was damn sure what TT and McC would say in June...especially if the report by John McClain is true...they told him what would happen before June.

 

[sho nuff]

lol at "Blunder"

Mark Maske = Moron

The union has a precedent, a previous case in which the Tennessee Titans tried to keep quarterback Steve McNair from working out as their facility during the offseason. McNair, also represented by Cook, ultimately was traded by the Titans to the Baltimore Ravens.

I think it's a mistake, if not a blunder, to try so vigorously to keep Favre out of camp. Goodell gifted them with an extra day after Favre was so kind as to wait to file the papers. They are not on an even keel.

The McNair situation in no way supports the conclusion that the Packers are making a mistake. The idea that the purpose of this trip is to "vigorously keep Favre out of camp" is pure speculation based on an anonymous report. It is quite likely that Favre himself has no desire to be in Green Bay under present circumstances. Goodell fully supports these efforts by the Packers and Favre to find a mutually agreeable resolution. It is absured of Maske to suggest there are grounds for a player grievance under these circumstances.

Shhh...Scotty believes any rumor/speculation based on anonymous reports he can if they shed a poor light on the Packers organization.

It is more likely that Favre is willing to do whatever it takes to get what he wants, and if that means creating a media circus around the Packers TC, then so be it. I am sure it isn't his first option, which is why he'd take part in the talks.Also Sho, I am waiting to hear some facts that back up your assertion regarding Berrian and his "dropping problem." Considering he had less drops than Randy Moss, T.O., and Plaxico Burress last year, I really can't wait to hear the revelations you've got to give me.

Having less than some of the league leaders does not mean he did not have a problem with the drops.Get it?

I doubt it...you don't seem to understand any type of logic.

 

[ScottyFargo]

lol at "Blunder"

Mark Maske = Moron

The union has a precedent, a previous case in which the Tennessee Titans tried to keep quarterback Steve McNair from working out as their facility during the offseason. McNair, also represented by Cook, ultimately was traded by the Titans to the Baltimore Ravens.

I think it's a mistake, if not a blunder, to try so vigorously to keep Favre out of camp. Goodell gifted them with an extra day after Favre was so kind as to wait to file the papers. They are not on an even keel.

The McNair situation in no way supports the conclusion that the Packers are making a mistake. The idea that the purpose of this trip is to "vigorously keep Favre out of camp" is pure speculation based on an anonymous report. It is quite likely that Favre himself has no desire to be in Green Bay under present circumstances. Goodell fully supports these efforts by the Packers and Favre to find a mutually agreeable resolution. It is absured of Maske to suggest there are grounds for a player grievance under these circumstances.

Shhh...Scotty believes any rumor/speculation based on anonymous reports he can if they shed a poor light on the Packers organization.

It is more likely that Favre is willing to do whatever it takes to get what he wants, and if that means creating a media circus around the Packers TC, then so be it. I am sure it isn't his first option, which is why he'd take part in the talks.Also Sho, I am waiting to hear some facts that back up your assertion regarding Berrian and his "dropping problem." Considering he had less drops than Randy Moss, T.O., and Plaxico Burress last year, I really can't wait to hear the revelations you've got to give me.

Having less than some of the league leaders does not mean he did not have a problem with the drops.Get it?

I doubt it...you don't seem to understand any type of logic.

Show me some logical numbers that support your claim, or apologize to Mr. Berrian.

 

[monessen]

 

[sho nuff]

Also Sho, I am waiting to hear some facts that back up your assertion regarding Berrian and his "dropping problem." Considering he had less drops than Randy Moss, T.O., and Plaxico Burress last year, I really can't wait to hear the revelations you've got to give me.

I just wanted to point out that I had fewer drops than those guys last year. OTOH I had fewer targets too.

He had 4 drops on 128 targets. 4 Drops out of 71 receptions. He doesn't have a problem with dropped balls, he had a problem being in a horrific offense. Things might open up for him this year.

Those "mighty" Vikings scored a whopping 31 more points than Chicago did last year. Ranked 18th in points scored to Minny's 15th.But you want more information on him dropping passes (oh...and it was not just about last season either).

"Berrian has had a few issues with drops but nothing like Williamson."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/16150607.html

"A big concern about Berrian is that he "drops too many passes."

http://www.dailynorseman.com/story/2008/3/9/103423/0198

This is not just some reputation that I made up.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

Bump. This was getting dangerously close to the middle of the first page.

VERY

 

[sho nuff]

lol at "Blunder"

Mark Maske = Moron

The union has a precedent, a previous case in which the Tennessee Titans tried to keep quarterback Steve McNair from working out as their facility during the offseason. McNair, also represented by Cook, ultimately was traded by the Titans to the Baltimore Ravens.

I think it's a mistake, if not a blunder, to try so vigorously to keep Favre out of camp. Goodell gifted them with an extra day after Favre was so kind as to wait to file the papers. They are not on an even keel.

The McNair situation in no way supports the conclusion that the Packers are making a mistake. The idea that the purpose of this trip is to "vigorously keep Favre out of camp" is pure speculation based on an anonymous report. It is quite likely that Favre himself has no desire to be in Green Bay under present circumstances. Goodell fully supports these efforts by the Packers and Favre to find a mutually agreeable resolution. It is absured of Maske to suggest there are grounds for a player grievance under these circumstances.

Shhh...Scotty believes any rumor/speculation based on anonymous reports he can if they shed a poor light on the Packers organization.

It is more likely that Favre is willing to do whatever it takes to get what he wants, and if that means creating a media circus around the Packers TC, then so be it. I am sure it isn't his first option, which is why he'd take part in the talks.Also Sho, I am waiting to hear some facts that back up your assertion regarding Berrian and his "dropping problem." Considering he had less drops than Randy Moss, T.O., and Plaxico Burress last year, I really can't wait to hear the revelations you've got to give me.

Having less than some of the league leaders does not mean he did not have a problem with the drops.Get it?

I doubt it...you don't seem to understand any type of logic.

Show me some logical numbers that support your claim, or apologize to Mr. Berrian.

Cannot find anything back further than last year...and it only lists people with 6 or more drops last year.Again...its not just about this year.

And its not as if I made up this reputation of his.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Show me some logical numbers that support your claim, or apologize to Mr. Berrian.

Cannot find anything back further than last year...and it only lists people with 6 or more drops last year.Again...its not just about this year.And its not as if I made up this reputation of his.

You're just repeating something you heard without backing it up with facts, that's all. He had four drops last year with Grossman and Orton throwing to him, 128 targets, 71 receptions. Come on, this should be easy for you.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Also Sho, I am waiting to hear some facts that back up your assertion regarding Berrian and his "dropping problem." Considering he had less drops than Randy Moss, T.O., and Plaxico Burress last year, I really can't wait to hear the revelations you've got to give me.

I just wanted to point out that I had fewer drops than those guys last year. OTOH I had fewer targets too.

He had 4 drops on 128 targets. 4 Drops out of 71 receptions. He doesn't have a problem with dropped balls, he had a problem being in a horrific offense. Things might open up for him this year.

Those "mighty" Vikings scored a whopping 31 more points than Chicago did last year. Ranked 18th in points scored to Minny's 15th.But you want more information on him dropping passes (oh...and it was not just about last season either).

"Berrian has had a few issues with drops but nothing like Williamson."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/16150607.html

"A big concern about Berrian is that he "drops too many passes."

http://www.dailynorseman.com/story/2008/3/9/103423/0198

This is not just some reputation that I made up.

I think that it is fantastic that one of the articles provided included some facts to help refute the "he drops passes A LOT" monicker people are spreading around. If you care to keep spreading around falsehoods without backing it up with facts, that's your call, I am just surprised by that choice because you have always been a defender of truth and pointer out of the obvious.

 

[sho nuff]

Show me some logical numbers that support your claim, or apologize to Mr. Berrian.

Cannot find anything back further than last year...and it only lists people with 6 or more drops last year.Again...its not just about this year.And its not as if I made up this reputation of his.

You're just repeating something you heard without backing it up with facts, that's all. He had four drops last year with Grossman and Orton throwing to him, 128 targets, 71 receptions. Come on, this should be easy for you.

Im repeating something that has been around Berrian for a while yes...I don't have the stats in front of me and only a few places even track them...so yes, I have to take the word of analysts in this case.Who the QB was is pretty irrelevant to the drops stat anyway. IIRC, they have to be catchable balls.And its not as if he is going to a team with Brady at QB.

 

[massraider]

Show me some logical numbers that support your claim, or apologize to Mr. Berrian.

Cannot find anything back further than last year...and it only lists people with 6 or more drops last year.Again...its not just about this year.And its not as if I made up this reputation of his.

You're just repeating something you heard without backing it up with facts, that's all. He had four drops last year with Grossman and Orton throwing to him, 128 targets, 71 receptions. Come on, this should be easy for you.

No, he didn't. he had more than that.I don't know who keeps drop stats, but they are crap. Berrian dropped some balls, more than his share.

 

[sho nuff]

Also Sho, I am waiting to hear some facts that back up your assertion regarding Berrian and his "dropping problem." Considering he had less drops than Randy Moss, T.O., and Plaxico Burress last year, I really can't wait to hear the revelations you've got to give me.

I just wanted to point out that I had fewer drops than those guys last year. OTOH I had fewer targets too.

He had 4 drops on 128 targets. 4 Drops out of 71 receptions. He doesn't have a problem with dropped balls, he had a problem being in a horrific offense. Things might open up for him this year.

Those "mighty" Vikings scored a whopping 31 more points than Chicago did last year. Ranked 18th in points scored to Minny's 15th.But you want more information on him dropping passes (oh...and it was not just about last season either).

"Berrian has had a few issues with drops but nothing like Williamson."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/16150607.html

"A big concern about Berrian is that he "drops too many passes."

http://www.dailynorseman.com/story/2008/3/9/103423/0198

This is not just some reputation that I made up.

I think that it is fantastic that one of the articles provided included some facts to help refute the "he drops passes A LOT" monicker people are spreading around. If you care to keep spreading around falsehoods without backing it up with facts, that's your call, I am just surprised by that choice because you have always been a defender of truth and pointer out of the obvious.

If you care to call it a falsehood without any supporting historical data...thats your call.The point is...it is a monicker that I did not just give him out of thin air. It is not just about last year (which is the only stat you seem to have at this point anyway).

 

[GreenNGold]

Rotoworld.com:

WTMJ-TV Channel 4 in Milwaukee, citing two sources, reported that Packers president Mark Murphy at least floated the idea of paying Favre a package in the neighborhood of $20 million over 10 years to remain retired.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Also Sho, I am waiting to hear some facts that back up your assertion regarding Berrian and his "dropping problem." Considering he had less drops than Randy Moss, T.O., and Plaxico Burress last year, I really can't wait to hear the revelations you've got to give me.

I just wanted to point out that I had fewer drops than those guys last year. OTOH I had fewer targets too.

He had 4 drops on 128 targets. 4 Drops out of 71 receptions. He doesn't have a problem with dropped balls, he had a problem being in a horrific offense. Things might open up for him this year.

Those "mighty" Vikings scored a whopping 31 more points than Chicago did last year. Ranked 18th in points scored to Minny's 15th.But you want more information on him dropping passes (oh...and it was not just about last season either).

"Berrian has had a few issues with drops but nothing like Williamson."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/16150607.html

"A big concern about Berrian is that he "drops too many passes."

http://www.dailynorseman.com/story/2008/3/9/103423/0198

This is not just some reputation that I made up.

I think that it is fantastic that one of the articles provided included some facts to help refute the "he drops passes A LOT" monicker people are spreading around. If you care to keep spreading around falsehoods without backing it up with facts, that's your call, I am just surprised by that choice because you have always been a defender of truth and pointer out of the obvious.

If you care to call it a falsehood without any supporting historical data...thats your call.The point is...it is a monicker that I did not just give him out of thin air. It is not just about last year (which is the only stat you seem to have at this point anyway).

Obviously you are unable to prove whether or not he is worse than average with dropping passes, which was on you to prove since it was your claim. I gave you information related to last year, which was more than fair considering it's his most recently played season. I do call it a perpetuation of a commonly held belief which is wrong. It used to be that the majority of people believed that the Earth was flat and that the sun revolved around it. If you would like to go along with the crowd, then go ahead.We've gone far off topic with this Berrian discussion, so I will apologize to anyone who found that tiresome.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Rotoworld.com:WTMJ-TV Channel 4 in Milwaukee, citing two sources, reported that Packers president Mark Murphy at least floated the idea of paying Favre a package in the neighborhood of $20 million over 10 years to remain retired.

O.k. so Favre camp sounds like they aren't interested in this option. Was this a bad call by Green Bay? Was this an act of desperation because they can't trade him? Frankly I would be offended if I were Favre because he stood to make something like 40 million if he played out the remaining 3 years on his contract (according to Mortenson on today's NFL Live, I don't have info on Favre's contract. I thought it was just 2 years.) Will Brett Favre be at Packer camp on Friday?

 

[ScottyFargo]

Eisen and Schefter on the Favre talks

This was pre-$20 mill buy off. Schefter says some interesting things about who the Packers might feel compelled to trade to...if it was a "blockbuster" deal.

 

[tazinib1]

The commish is now delaying Favres reinstatement to allow both sides to come to an agreement????

COME ON!!!! I"M SICK of this already.

 

[Gordo]

Also Sho, I am waiting to hear some facts that back up your assertion regarding Berrian and his "dropping problem." Considering he had less drops than Randy Moss, T.O., and Plaxico Burress last year, I really can't wait to hear the revelations you've got to give me.

I just wanted to point out that I had fewer drops than those guys last year. OTOH I had fewer targets too.

He had 4 drops on 128 targets. 4 Drops out of 71 receptions. He doesn't have a problem with dropped balls, he had a problem being in a horrific offense. Things might open up for him this year.

Those "mighty" Vikings scored a whopping 31 more points than Chicago did last year. Ranked 18th in points scored to Minny's 15th.But you want more information on him dropping passes (oh...and it was not just about last season either).

"Berrian has had a few issues with drops but nothing like Williamson."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/16150607.html

"A big concern about Berrian is that he "drops too many passes."

http://www.dailynorseman.com/story/2008/3/9/103423/0198

This is not just some reputation that I made up.

I think that it is fantastic that one of the articles provided included some facts to help refute the "he drops passes A LOT" monicker people are spreading around. If you care to keep spreading around falsehoods without backing it up with facts, that's your call, I am just surprised by that choice because you have always been a defender of truth and pointer out of the obvious.

If you care to call it a falsehood without any supporting historical data...thats your call.The point is...it is a monicker that I did not just give him out of thin air. It is not just about last year (which is the only stat you seem to have at this point anyway).

Obviously you are unable to prove whether or not he is worse than average with dropping passes, which was on you to prove since it was your claim. I gave you information related to last year, which was more than fair considering it's his most recently played season. I do call it a perpetuation of a commonly held belief which is wrong. It used to be that the majority of people believed that the Earth was flat and that the sun revolved around it. If you would like to go along with the crowd, then go ahead.We've gone far off topic with this Berrian discussion, so I will apologize to anyone who found that tiresome.

No worries! I am sure that no one has found any of the ScottyFargo/sho nuff debate the least bit tiring.

 

[skol asylum]

Eisen and Schefter on the Favre talks

This was pre-$20 mill buy off. Schefter says some interesting things about who the Packers might feel compelled to trade to...if it was a "blockbuster" deal.

championship

 

[Franknbeans]

Eisen and Schefter on the Favre talks

This was pre-$20 mill buy off. Schefter says some interesting things about who the Packers might feel compelled to trade to...if it was a "blockbuster" deal.

championship

this outcome would be great for the NFLTIME FOR PACKERS TO PUNT

Posted by Mike Florio on July 31, 2008, 6:30 a.m.

We’ve tried to be as neutral as possible regarding the situation between the Green Bay Packers and Brett Favre. In our view, each side bears responsibility for a situation that has tarnished the reputation of the team and the legacy of the player.

But in light of multiple reports that the Packers have offered Favre huge money to stay retired, we think that the time has come for the Packers to do the right thing and release Favre.

It’s obvious that the Packers don’t want Favre on their team. It’s obvious that the Packers don’t want him to be a member of any team they’ll play twice this season.

It’s obvious that they can’t have it both ways.

There have been suggestions that, if/when Favre reports for training camp, he’ll be limited to individual drills, presumably to avoid the appearance of a quarterback competition and to prevent an injury that would require the team to pay him $12 million over one year as opposed to $20 million over ten.

Though there have been many situations in which a team has had the right and the ability to squeeze a player in similar ways (the Falcons are currently doing it to receiver Joe Horn, in our opinion), none of those players has had Favre’s stature. And though I’ve criticized Favre for thinking that the rules that apply to other players don’t apply to him, maybe the rules shouldn’t apply to the man who holds every career passing record (including one he likely didn’t want to set) whose team inexplicably would prefer to go with an unproven quarterback over a well-known commodity.

If the Packers don’t want Favre, that’s fine. But don’t put the guy on ice, don’t play games with him, and don’t make unseemly bribes in order to keep him from playing football.

Our guess is that, bright and early on Thursday morning, Commissioner Roger Goodell will get on the horn with Packers president Mark Murphy and ask whether the reported offer of pay-for-no-play is true. If it is, Goodell likely will give the Packers the closest thing to a direct order that he possibly can to let Brett go.

Goodell got involved because he knows it’s good for the game for Favre to be playing for someone. With the Packers unable to dictate where Favre will play and unwilling to let Favre play for the Packers, there’s only one answer.

Cut him loose. Give him his freedom. If he’s earned the ability to make $20 million to stay in Mississippi, he’s earned the ability to be able to play anywhere he chooses, if he’s truly not wanted in Wisconsin.

 

[bbuster]

I agree with that Scotty. Mostly it is a blunder because it shows the Packers have been actively misrepresenting the situaiton from the beginning.He was never welcome. He wanted to play at GB and was told he was not welcome. Then they turned to the media and said he was. They did not want to trade him, did not want him in camp, did not want him to play period.They sent someone down from FO to ask him to stay retired.Now to ask him to VOLUNTARILY stay out of camp. And then they lie about it to the fans.This is some of the worst management decisions in the history of the league.I am embarrassed. And ashamed. What is the worst is that so many Favre haters blame him so much for wanting to unretire. He made a mistake. He admitted it. He has not been selfish, he JUST WANTS TO PLAY.Thompson should be "hung in effigy". For me, it ruins the success he has had putting togethor the team. I might rather have been a worse team last year and never had this nonsense clouding an organization that was once respected and is now a laughing stock. Better to lose with integrity than win by being dishonest and disrespectful to someone who has given so much.There it is. Public opinion in Packland can go to hell. They could simply have taken him back in June. Period. They chose not to and were arrogant enough to think they could convince him not to play. Thomspon = Arrogant SOB.Bring it on Haters, because it seems pretty obvious to those playing close attention.

This is getting more ridiculous by the moment...$20 million to stay away? So few teams will ever experience a player like Favre. What he has done for the franchise for 16 years should say enough. I'm curious how Denver fans would have responded if Elway had changed his mind after he retired and the Broncos said "no thanks, we've moved on". "Please just stay away...we'll give you $20 mill to stay home". DISGRACEFUL...I hang my head in shame as a life long Packer fan.

 

[H.K.]

John Houseman tried to make Jonathan E. retire early....and we all know how that turned out.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Eisen and Schefter on the Favre talks

This was pre-$20 mill buy off. Schefter says some interesting things about who the Packers might feel compelled to trade to...if it was a "blockbuster" deal.

championship

this outcome would be great for the NFLTIME FOR PACKERS TO PUNT

Posted by Mike Florio on July 31, 2008, 6:30 a.m.

We’ve tried to be as neutral as possible regarding the situation between the Green Bay Packers and Brett Favre. In our view, each side bears responsibility for a situation that has tarnished the reputation of the team and the legacy of the player.

But in light of multiple reports that the Packers have offered Favre huge money to stay retired, we think that the time has come for the Packers to do the right thing and release Favre.

It’s obvious that the Packers don’t want Favre on their team. It’s obvious that the Packers don’t want him to be a member of any team they’ll play twice this season.

It’s obvious that they can’t have it both ways.

There have been suggestions that, if/when Favre reports for training camp, he’ll be limited to individual drills, presumably to avoid the appearance of a quarterback competition and to prevent an injury that would require the team to pay him $12 million over one year as opposed to $20 million over ten.

Though there have been many situations in which a team has had the right and the ability to squeeze a player in similar ways (the Falcons are currently doing it to receiver Joe Horn, in our opinion), none of those players has had Favre’s stature. And though I’ve criticized Favre for thinking that the rules that apply to other players don’t apply to him, maybe the rules shouldn’t apply to the man who holds every career passing record (including one he likely didn’t want to set) whose team inexplicably would prefer to go with an unproven quarterback over a well-known commodity.

If the Packers don’t want Favre, that’s fine. But don’t put the guy on ice, don’t play games with him, and don’t make unseemly bribes in order to keep him from playing football.

Our guess is that, bright and early on Thursday morning, Commissioner Roger Goodell will get on the horn with Packers president Mark Murphy and ask whether the reported offer of pay-for-no-play is true. If it is, Goodell likely will give the Packers the closest thing to a direct order that he possibly can to let Brett go.

Goodell got involved because he knows it’s good for the game for Favre to be playing for someone. With the Packers unable to dictate where Favre will play and unwilling to let Favre play for the Packers, there’s only one answer.

Cut him loose. Give him his freedom. If he’s earned the ability to make $20 million to stay in Mississippi, he’s earned the ability to be able to play anywhere he chooses, if he’s truly not wanted in Wisconsin.

So...how do people think Green Bay's doing in the battle for public opinion now?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

So do people still think this is all Favre's fault? Geez, Green Bay really seeming dumb here.

 

[mozzy84]

tried to pay him off to go away

 

[bbuster]

So do people still think this is all Favre's fault? Geez, Green Bay really seeming dumb here.

I never have thought it was his fault...even though he hasn't handled things perfectly. I think the way the Packers have been handling it from the beginning has been pathetic. The people here who try to lay it all on Favre always will. They are the ones who call him a media whore, and yet they can never wait to get their opinions heard. They complain about all the Favre threads and that the story will never go away...and yet they are always in the middle of it.

 

[Flash]

Rotoworld.com:WTMJ-TV Channel 4 in Milwaukee, citing two sources, reported that Packers president Mark Murphy at least floated the idea of paying Favre a package in the neighborhood of $20 million over 10 years to remain retired.

I am embarrassed to be a Packer fan today :(

 

[Flash]

So do people still think this is all Favre's fault? Geez, Green Bay really seeming dumb here.

Anyone who thinks Favre didn't cause this, is blind. He did. But he knows he did and understood the Packers stance and offered to compete for his job, the Packers denied that, and that's where it turns back to the Packers dropping the ball and embarrassing the franchise by how they continue to screw the pooch here.

 

[BigJim®]

Say, I'm curious how this works. Do pathetic under the table bribes need to be voted on by the shareholders?

 

[CLIFF]

All I really want to know is where can I get my Minn #4 jersey.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

So do people still think this is all Favre's fault? Geez, Green Bay really seeming dumb here.

Anyone who thinks Favre didn't cause this, is blind. He did. But he knows he did and understood the Packers stance and offered to compete for his job, the Packers denied that, and that's where it turns back to the Packers dropping the ball and embarrassing the franchise by how they continue to screw the pooch here.

Agree completely. Favre started it, but then Thompson's insistence that Favre not compete for the job is what got us here. They need to either trade or release him, but this $20m offer makes it seem like they're desperate to do neither. I think the issue is that no team is going to offer much for him because either they don't really need him (have a good QB or are rebuilding) or they know/think he'll be released. The Packers have no leverage in any trade talks. Just crazy.

 

[DanFouts]

I wish the whole story would go away. It is taking away from everything I like about the preseaon. I liked to hear about other teams, how people look in camp, etc. Now EVERYTHING on Sirius seems to be yapping about Favre.....go away.....

 

[Golden Mike Tomczak]

Oh Favre Bean Waffle Head.

He'll play. I know it.

Whats the latest? Goodell needs to reinstate him?

EDIT: Just saw the 20 Million Dollar deal to stay retired. I would do that in a heartbeat.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Maybe this has been discussed before, but I've tried to stay out of the whole Favre thing for the most part.

But I find it interesting that Favre ripped Javon Walker and some other guys when those guys were holding out for more money when they were making very little compared to their production and compared to him. He called them selfish, implied that they weren't team players, and told them to live up to their contract.

Now Favre has retired, wants to come back, and refuses to live by the contract that he signed. If it's all about what is doing what's right for the team and honoring the contract, and the Packers have determined that starting Rogers is what's best for the team, then Favre should obviously just live up to his contract and go be the backup, right? He's not exactly being a team player here, right? But he doesn't want to live by his contract, he wants to go start for someone else of his choosing. He demanded early on in this thing to be released.

 

[GreenNGold]

Maybe this has been discussed before, but I've tried to stay out of the whole Favre thing for the most part.But I find it interesting that Favre ripped Javon Walker and some other guys when those guys were holding out for more money when they were making very little compared to their production and compared to him. He called them selfish, implied that they weren't team players, and told them to live up to their contract. Now Favre has retired, wants to come back, and refuses to live by the contract that he signed. If it's all about what is doing what's right for the team and honoring the contract, and the Packers have determined that starting Rogers is what's best for the team, then Favre should obviously just live up to his contract and go be the backup, right? He's not exactly being a team player here, right? But he doesn't want to live by his contract, he wants to go start for someone else of his choosing. He demanded early on in this thing to be released.

How can people seriously still have this mindset??? Favre has yet to do anything against his contract. I also don't remember the Packers offering Javon Walker or anyone else money to retire.

 

[bbuster]

Maybe this has been discussed before, but I've tried to stay out of the whole Favre thing for the most part.But I find it interesting that Favre ripped Javon Walker and some other guys when those guys were holding out for more money when they were making very little compared to their production and compared to him. He called them selfish, implied that they weren't team players, and told them to live up to their contract. Now Favre has retired, wants to come back, and refuses to live by the contract that he signed. If it's all about what is doing what's right for the team and honoring the contract, and the Packers have determined that starting Rogers is what's best for the team, then Favre should obviously just live up to his contract and go be the backup, right? He's not exactly being a team player here, right? But he doesn't want to live by his contract, he wants to go start for someone else of his choosing. He demanded early on in this thing to be released.

Yes, it has been discussed...over and over. It's not Favre unwilling to "live up to his contract". The Packers do not want him PERIOD. Not as a backup, starter, or in camp at all.

 

[jurrassic]

Trade him to Minnesota for 3rd round pick. Pick him off 3 times in the first game when he tries to throw the deep ball.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Trade him to Minnesota for 3rd round pick. Pick him off 3 times in the first game when he tries to throw the deep ball.

A 3rd is all I'd rather give up for him since odds are he's only going to play one season, win lose or draw. I think Adam Schefter would be right though, and they'd still demand a big offer because they know the ramifications. Whether the Vikings are willing to Pony up a 1st or more for one season of what might not even live up to the standard he set last year is the question.

 

[sho nuff]

Obviously you are unable to prove whether or not he is worse than average with dropping passes, which was on you to prove since it was your claim. I gave you information related to last year, which was more than fair considering it's his most recently played season. I do call it a perpetuation of a commonly held belief which is wrong. It used to be that the majority of people believed that the Earth was flat and that the sun revolved around it. If you would like to go along with the crowd, then go ahead.We've gone far off topic with this Berrian discussion, so I will apologize to anyone who found that tiresome.

The big question is...why do you think that perception is wrong? Because of the most recent stats? I doubt it...I think it has to do with what uniform he is now wearing.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Maybe this has been discussed before, but I've tried to stay out of the whole Favre thing for the most part.But I find it interesting that Favre ripped Javon Walker and some other guys when those guys were holding out for more money when they were making very little compared to their production and compared to him. He called them selfish, implied that they weren't team players, and told them to live up to their contract. Now Favre has retired, wants to come back, and refuses to live by the contract that he signed. If it's all about what is doing what's right for the team and honoring the contract, and the Packers have determined that starting Rogers is what's best for the team, then Favre should obviously just live up to his contract and go be the backup, right? He's not exactly being a team player here, right? But he doesn't want to live by his contract, he wants to go start for someone else of his choosing. He demanded early on in this thing to be released.

Yes, it has been discussed...over and over. It's not Favre unwilling to "live up to his contract". The Packers do not want him PERIOD. Not as a backup, starter, or in camp at all.

The Packers seem to have indicated that they would take him back as the backup or they're willing to trade him to the team of their choosing. Favre doesn't want to be the backup and obviously wants to play for either the Vikings or Bears. I'd say that by refusing to be the backup and refusing to accept being traded to who the Packers want to trade him to is not being a team player.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

Trade him to Minnesota for 3rd round pick. Pick him off 3 times in the first game when he tries to throw the deep ball.

A 3rd is all I'd rather give up for him since odds are he's only going to play one season, win lose or draw. I think Adam Schefter would be right though, and they'd still demand a big offer because they know the ramifications. Whether the Vikings are willing to Pony up a 1st or more for one season of what might not even live up to the standard he set last year is the question.

Has there ever been a report of the Vikings actually inquiring about a trade? Everyone seems to think that the Vikings are the team that wants him so badly. I know there are the tampering allegations, but we don't know if they are true or not. All indications are that they are excited about Jackson's progress so I wouldn't just assume that they would throw a bunch at the Packers to get him.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Maybe this has been discussed before, but I've tried to stay out of the whole Favre thing for the most part.But I find it interesting that Favre ripped Javon Walker and some other guys when those guys were holding out for more money when they were making very little compared to their production and compared to him. He called them selfish, implied that they weren't team players, and told them to live up to their contract. Now Favre has retired, wants to come back, and refuses to live by the contract that he signed. If it's all about what is doing what's right for the team and honoring the contract, and the Packers have determined that starting Rogers is what's best for the team, then Favre should obviously just live up to his contract and go be the backup, right? He's not exactly being a team player here, right? But he doesn't want to live by his contract, he wants to go start for someone else of his choosing. He demanded early on in this thing to be released.

Yes, it has been discussed...over and over. It's not Favre unwilling to "live up to his contract". The Packers do not want him PERIOD. Not as a backup, starter, or in camp at all.

The Packers seem to have indicated that they would take him back as the backup or they're willing to trade him to the team of their choosing. Favre doesn't want to be the backup and obviously wants to play for either the Vikings or Bears. I'd say that by refusing to be the backup and refusing to accept being traded to who the Packers want to trade him to is not being a team player.

So you think a guy who has an amazing games played streak should voluntarily end it?

 

[ScottyFargo]

Obviously you are unable to prove whether or not he is worse than average with dropping passes, which was on you to prove since it was your claim. I gave you information related to last year, which was more than fair considering it's his most recently played season. I do call it a perpetuation of a commonly held belief which is wrong. It used to be that the majority of people believed that the Earth was flat and that the sun revolved around it. If you would like to go along with the crowd, then go ahead.We've gone far off topic with this Berrian discussion, so I will apologize to anyone who found that tiresome.

The big question is...why do you think that perception is wrong? Because of the most recent stats? I doubt it...I think it has to do with what uniform he is now wearing.

Hey, start a new thread, answer the original question with more than hearsay, or cut it out.

 

[sho nuff]

Eisen and Schefter on the Favre talks

This was pre-$20 mill buy off. Schefter says some interesting things about who the Packers might feel compelled to trade to...if it was a "blockbuster" deal.

championship

this outcome would be great for the NFLTIME FOR PACKERS TO PUNT

Posted by Mike Florio on July 31, 2008, 6:30 a.m.

We’ve tried to be as neutral as possible regarding the situation between the Green Bay Packers and Brett Favre. In our view, each side bears responsibility for a situation that has tarnished the reputation of the team and the legacy of the player.

But in light of multiple reports that the Packers have offered Favre huge money to stay retired, we think that the time has come for the Packers to do the right thing and release Favre.

It’s obvious that the Packers don’t want Favre on their team. It’s obvious that the Packers don’t want him to be a member of any team they’ll play twice this season.

It’s obvious that they can’t have it both ways.

There have been suggestions that, if/when Favre reports for training camp, he’ll be limited to individual drills, presumably to avoid the appearance of a quarterback competition and to prevent an injury that would require the team to pay him $12 million over one year as opposed to $20 million over ten.

Though there have been many situations in which a team has had the right and the ability to squeeze a player in similar ways (the Falcons are currently doing it to receiver Joe Horn, in our opinion), none of those players has had Favre’s stature. And though I’ve criticized Favre for thinking that the rules that apply to other players don’t apply to him, maybe the rules shouldn’t apply to the man who holds every career passing record (including one he likely didn’t want to set) whose team inexplicably would prefer to go with an unproven quarterback over a well-known commodity.

If the Packers don’t want Favre, that’s fine. But don’t put the guy on ice, don’t play games with him, and don’t make unseemly bribes in order to keep him from playing football.

Our guess is that, bright and early on Thursday morning, Commissioner Roger Goodell will get on the horn with Packers president Mark Murphy and ask whether the reported offer of pay-for-no-play is true. If it is, Goodell likely will give the Packers the closest thing to a direct order that he possibly can to let Brett go.

Goodell got involved because he knows it’s good for the game for Favre to be playing for someone. With the Packers unable to dictate where Favre will play and unwilling to let Favre play for the Packers, there’s only one answer.

Cut him loose. Give him his freedom. If he’s earned the ability to make $20 million to stay in Mississippi, he’s earned the ability to be able to play anywhere he chooses, if he’s truly not wanted in Wisconsin.

So...how do people think Green Bay's doing in the battle for public opinion now?

Not so well.As i said when I first heard the 20 million thing...if true...just dumb dumb dumb.

I understand the only letting him do individual drills if they are trying to move him (hoping he does not get hurt)...but its dumb too.

As for the PFT article...and what I bolded...if I were Thompson or Murphy and Goodell called me directing me to do something with a player...I would tell him to kiss my hind end and mind his own business...this is a player personnel issue that is not under his control but under the team's control.

Maybe he should hurry up his tampering investigation and give the team an indication of what might happen with Jolly.

 

[sho nuff]

So do people still think this is all Favre's fault? Geez, Green Bay really seeming dumb here.

To start out...yes, it was mostly his fault.I don't think many have said that it was ever all his fault.Right now...the Packers are coming out looking worse and worse every day with some of these antics.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Trade him to Minnesota for 3rd round pick. Pick him off 3 times in the first game when he tries to throw the deep ball.

A 3rd is all I'd rather give up for him since odds are he's only going to play one season, win lose or draw. I think Adam Schefter would be right though, and they'd still demand a big offer because they know the ramifications. Whether the Vikings are willing to Pony up a 1st or more for one season of what might not even live up to the standard he set last year is the question.

Has there ever been a report of the Vikings actually inquiring about a trade? Everyone seems to think that the Vikings are the team that wants him so badly. I know there are the tampering allegations, but we don't know if they are true or not. All indications are that they are excited about Jackson's progress so I wouldn't just assume that they would throw a bunch at the Packers to get him.

Personally, I don't think the Vikings enticed him to come back, I think he made that decision on his own. I do think that the Vikings would be crazy to not want him on the team that they've built. Yes, they could stand behind Tarvaris...but Favre handing off to Adrian Peterson or making those fast passes to Rice makes a run into the playoffs that much more likely.There aren't much postings about the interest from the Vikings side becuase they haven't been given permission to talk to him, and he's not reinstated yet.

 

[sho nuff]

So do people still think this is all Favre's fault? Geez, Green Bay really seeming dumb here.

I never have thought it was his fault...even though he hasn't handled things perfectly. I think the way the Packers have been handling it from the beginning has been pathetic. The people here who try to lay it all on Favre always will. They are the ones who call him a media whore, and yet they can never wait to get their opinions heard. They complain about all the Favre threads and that the story will never go away...and yet they are always in the middle of it.

Sadly...even most of them are on Favre's side for some reason now.Prior to this...they all whined about him and the attention he got...now they take every word of his as gospel and bash the packers mostly. (its because they will take anything they can to try and bash the Packers...when Favre was an active member and the starter, he was the target...now that he is going more against the team, he is their ally).

 

[ScottyFargo]

So do people still think this is all Favre's fault? Geez, Green Bay really seeming dumb here.

I never have thought it was his fault...even though he hasn't handled things perfectly. I think the way the Packers have been handling it from the beginning has been pathetic. The people here who try to lay it all on Favre always will. They are the ones who call him a media whore, and yet they can never wait to get their opinions heard. They complain about all the Favre threads and that the story will never go away...and yet they are always in the middle of it.

Sadly...even most of them are on Favre's side for some reason now.Prior to this...they all whined about him and the attention he got...now they take every word of his as gospel and bash the packers mostly. (its because they will take anything they can to try and bash the Packers...when Favre was an active member and the starter, he was the target...now that he is going more against the team, he is their ally).

Somebody's gotta stand up for the heroes. Did you know he stayed home to help TT keep his job? True story.

 

[T Bell]

Maybe this has been discussed before, but I've tried to stay out of the whole Favre thing for the most part.But I find it interesting that Favre ripped Javon Walker and some other guys when those guys were holding out for more money when they were making very little compared to their production and compared to him. He called them selfish, implied that they weren't team players, and told them to live up to their contract. Now Favre has retired, wants to come back, and refuses to live by the contract that he signed. If it's all about what is doing what's right for the team and honoring the contract, and the Packers have determined that starting Rogers is what's best for the team, then Favre should obviously just live up to his contract and go be the backup, right? He's not exactly being a team player here, right? But he doesn't want to live by his contract, he wants to go start for someone else of his choosing. He demanded early on in this thing to be released.

Yes, it has been discussed...over and over. It's not Favre unwilling to "live up to his contract". The Packers do not want him PERIOD. Not as a backup, starter, or in camp at all.

The Packers seem to have indicated that they would take him back as the backup or they're willing to trade him to the team of their choosing. Favre doesn't want to be the backup and obviously wants to play for either the Vikings or Bears. I'd say that by refusing to be the backup and refusing to accept being traded to who the Packers want to trade him to is not being a team player.

So you think a guy who has an amazing games played streak should voluntarily end it?

So all of this is about his games played streak?

 

[sho nuff]

So do people still think this is all Favre's fault? Geez, Green Bay really seeming dumb here.

I never have thought it was his fault...even though he hasn't handled things perfectly. I think the way the Packers have been handling it from the beginning has been pathetic. The people here who try to lay it all on Favre always will. They are the ones who call him a media whore, and yet they can never wait to get their opinions heard. They complain about all the Favre threads and that the story will never go away...and yet they are always in the middle of it.

Sadly...even most of them are on Favre's side for some reason now.Prior to this...they all whined about him and the attention he got...now they take every word of his as gospel and bash the packers mostly. (its because they will take anything they can to try and bash the Packers...when Favre was an active member and the starter, he was the target...now that he is going more against the team, he is their ally).

Somebody's gotta stand up for the heroes. Did you know he stayed home to help TT keep his job? True story.

True story? Or rumor that has several different sides to it?I think he also helped a little old lady cross the street the other day...such a southern gentleman.