How's the Packer decision to go with Rodgers looking now? (1 Viewer)

[Phase of the Game]

This sure seems like a GM that wants his QB back...

Jets quarterback Brett Favre sat down with some reporters in New York today and detailed the talks he had this off-season with Packers General Manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy.

It’s clear that Favre doesn’t have warm memories of either, especially Thompson.

In an amusing portion of his interview with the New York Post, Favre talks about the visit that Thompson made to his Mississippi home after the NFL draft. Favre said he thought they were going to talk about him potentially coming back, but instead they talked about an odd offer that Thompson made.

“Then he kind of gets quiet,” Favre said, recalling what Thompson said to him, “and says, ‘We want to do something special for you, and what do you think if we …’ and these were his words exactly, ‘dismantle your locker and send it to you.’

“I was like, ‘What the hell are you talking about?’ I was like, ‘Um, OK Ted, great.’

“He said, ‘It’s going to be your locker, we’ll send it to you. Now, it’s going to be in a box.’

“I’m thinking, ‘Way to get my ### out the door.’ That’s the craziest thing I’ve ever heard of. What the hell am I going to do with a locker? So I just said, ‘Oh, OK, Ted, that’s great.’”

http://www.packerforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=16218

 

[sho nuff]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

Again...an of you care to back up this "the real Packer fans" crap?Sorry, I have no jealousy based vendetta against Favre. What am I jealous of?I defended the guy for years and years...there is no vendetta at all.And the majority of fans both on message boards and just about every poll ever taken...do not agree that TT is as bad as you all are claiming.You simply have no facts to back that up.Sure...some of you will talk about people calling into talk radio....ever wonder why usually negative people call in?Heck...2 years ago people were calling in down here to get rid of Jeff Fisher...thats the extreme position people take when people who don't know as much about football as they think they do...call up to talk radio shows to complain because the team is not doing exactly what they want it to be doing.

It would seem to me that TT is the whole reason that the bad D, bad line, etc that you talk about is there. So no matter which side you look at it TT is at fault.Getting rid of #4 was a mistake. Good ol' 4 was one over-time game away from a super bowl on a 3 loss season. Sure he threw the Int in overtime but he was the offense. The rushing game put up a total of about 25-30 yds rushing. The only offense GB had was Favre passing. The giants were putting together good drives and won the TOP battle by about 2 to 1. The giants knew the Packers could not run and just had to find a way to force the mistakes in the passing game. If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way.The loss was a TEAM loss not all because of Favre as some like to point out. Sure he was trying to make something happen but the whole team failed around him.The packers are absolutely a better team with Favre at QB versus Rodgers. He's proven that this year by going into a brand new system and getting his team into good shape for the play-offs. Rodgers has practiced this offense for awhile now and has done a respectable job this year but I do not see him carrying a team the way Favre did right now. Rodgers is a slightly above average QB and if the rest of the team is sub-par or average the the Packers will be average.

Really? TT is the reason that Cullen Jenkins got hurt? Nick Barnett too?TT made Bigby miss Lance Moore the other night?TT made Pickett get worse? Wow.Sure, you can blame him for not resigning Corey Williams during the season last year...I have said that many times actually. Though, Corey has not really be lighting it up in Cleveland either while playing next to Rogers.I put blame on the players as well though. Several are simply not playing up to how they played last year on D. The line and LBs mainly. The secondary, prior to Monday, had been playing at an elite level.Good ol #4 was not the only reason that team was 13-3 last year either.And he threw more than one INT that game and was pretty off most of the game...as was Harris on Burress...as was the Oline, and IMO it was one of McCarthy's poorest called games from a coaching standpoint. I have never blamed just Favre for that game and won't start now.As for blaming Grant's run on the pick? Are you kidding? Had Favre just thrown the ball to the outside rather than the inside, it would have been a first down. It was a good read...but a bad throw. He threw it the one place he could not afford to miss. And it cost him and the team.And I agree...Rodgers is not carrying the team. Going into this year I did not expect him to or expect him to have to. The defense played so much better last year and what it looked like we would have had for a running game (which they have had the past few games), he should not have to do as much on his own. So far, that has not worked out as the D has not been good, punting has not helped them either...and the running game is just recently getting back on track.

 

[J R]

So it was dismal in Green Bay before Favre arrived. And now, in the first season he is gone, the team has a losing record and will miss the playoffs. There are a lot of reasons for it, and QB play is certainly one of them IMO. I think Rodgers has played well, especially for a first year starter, and he has been better than I expected. But I think those that think there has been no dropoff from what it would have been had Favre stayed are wrong.

I think it's early to say that the team will miss the playoffs; they're only one game out of first and they're 3-1 in the division. I think it's fair to say that the team would have been better with Favre this year; what's not clear is whether the team would have been as good in 2009 and 2010 if they'd kept Favre starting in 2008.

Sorry, but you play for the upcoming year. You plan a year ahead knowing that plans change. Taking a 13-3 team and having the possibility of returning the same, or near the same, players the next year far outweighs what might happen in 2009 or 2010. You worry about 2009 when 2009 is here and not before 2008 even begins. All in all, a team should want their best team out there on day one. The NFL, players, and some fans know a team with Favre at QB versus a first year starter is going to be better 99% of the time. No way do I bet on the 1%.

Only problem is...GMs don't just think about the one year. Poor GMs might...but good ones don't.Im still waiting for any of you continuing this to show where anyone just thought they would be better with Rodgers this year?

Good GMs don't run a great QB out of town like TT did and the vast majority of executives in the NFL acknowledge that is what TT did with Favre. TT could have gone one more year with Favre AND Rodgers but TT didn't want to do that. That is the truth and the TT supporters WILL NEVER ACKNOWLEDGE THIS even though it is reported more and more by the NFL insiders.

That QB first left town on his own.Some of you act as if TT just told him to get out as soon as he got to town.And the vast majority of executives acknowledge that is what he did? Care to back that up with any substance like a link? I won't hold my breath.TT would have let him back had he never retired and done the I want to come back...no I don't routine. A fact that some of you will never acknowledge no matter how many people tell you its true.And I, and others have acknowledged that TT wanted to see what Rodgers could do and wanted to move on after last season...but they would have taken him back. That much is perfectly clear.

All facts,

They are not facts. Here is a fact.....Thompson didn't make one phone call or attempt to contact Favre prior to his retirement. That sure doesn't make it seem like Thompson was hoping for Favre to return. I also trust what Terry Bradshaw stated last week that it is widely known by NFL insiders that Thompson wanted Favre gone for two years. Others on ESPN have stated that as well. Why would Favre want to go back to GB knowing that Thompson didn't want him back?

Is the part about what Terry Bradshaw said about what "insiders' know a fact as well? Because it sure looks like speculation to me.

 

[Phase of the Game]

So it was dismal in Green Bay before Favre arrived. And now, in the first season he is gone, the team has a losing record and will miss the playoffs. There are a lot of reasons for it, and QB play is certainly one of them IMO. I think Rodgers has played well, especially for a first year starter, and he has been better than I expected. But I think those that think there has been no dropoff from what it would have been had Favre stayed are wrong.

I think it's early to say that the team will miss the playoffs; they're only one game out of first and they're 3-1 in the division. I think it's fair to say that the team would have been better with Favre this year; what's not clear is whether the team would have been as good in 2009 and 2010 if they'd kept Favre starting in 2008.

Sorry, but you play for the upcoming year. You plan a year ahead knowing that plans change. Taking a 13-3 team and having the possibility of returning the same, or near the same, players the next year far outweighs what might happen in 2009 or 2010. You worry about 2009 when 2009 is here and not before 2008 even begins. All in all, a team should want their best team out there on day one. The NFL, players, and some fans know a team with Favre at QB versus a first year starter is going to be better 99% of the time. No way do I bet on the 1%.

Only problem is...GMs don't just think about the one year. Poor GMs might...but good ones don't.Im still waiting for any of you continuing this to show where anyone just thought they would be better with Rodgers this year?

Good GMs don't run a great QB out of town like TT did and the vast majority of executives in the NFL acknowledge that is what TT did with Favre. TT could have gone one more year with Favre AND Rodgers but TT didn't want to do that. That is the truth and the TT supporters WILL NEVER ACKNOWLEDGE THIS even though it is reported more and more by the NFL insiders.

That QB first left town on his own.Some of you act as if TT just told him to get out as soon as he got to town.And the vast majority of executives acknowledge that is what he did? Care to back that up with any substance like a link? I won't hold my breath.TT would have let him back had he never retired and done the I want to come back...no I don't routine. A fact that some of you will never acknowledge no matter how many people tell you its true.And I, and others have acknowledged that TT wanted to see what Rodgers could do and wanted to move on after last season...but they would have taken him back. That much is perfectly clear.

All facts,

They are not facts. Here is a fact.....Thompson didn't make one phone call or attempt to contact Favre prior to his retirement. That sure doesn't make it seem like Thompson was hoping for Favre to return. I also trust what Terry Bradshaw stated last week that it is widely known by NFL insiders that Thompson wanted Favre gone for two years. Others on ESPN have stated that as well. Why would Favre want to go back to GB knowing that Thompson didn't want him back?

Is the part about what Terry Bradshaw said about what "insiders' know a fact as well? Because it sure looks like speculation to me.

I'd be willing to bet that Bradshaw has insider connections that none of us have and I highly doubt he would make that claim without being able to back it up. It has been written about as well and Steve Mariucci has confirmed it as well. I don't know why the TT supporters can't acknowledge that he didn't want Favre back.

 

[Phase of the Game]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

Again...an of you care to back up this "the real Packer fans" crap?Sorry, I have no jealousy based vendetta against Favre. What am I jealous of?I defended the guy for years and years...there is no vendetta at all.And the majority of fans both on message boards and just about every poll ever taken...do not agree that TT is as bad as you all are claiming.You simply have no facts to back that up.Sure...some of you will talk about people calling into talk radio....ever wonder why usually negative people call in?Heck...2 years ago people were calling in down here to get rid of Jeff Fisher...thats the extreme position people take when people who don't know as much about football as they think they do...call up to talk radio shows to complain because the team is not doing exactly what they want it to be doing.

It would seem to me that TT is the whole reason that the bad D, bad line, etc that you talk about is there. So no matter which side you look at it TT is at fault.Getting rid of #4 was a mistake. Good ol' 4 was one over-time game away from a super bowl on a 3 loss season. Sure he threw the Int in overtime but he was the offense. The rushing game put up a total of about 25-30 yds rushing. The only offense GB had was Favre passing. The giants were putting together good drives and won the TOP battle by about 2 to 1. The giants knew the Packers could not run and just had to find a way to force the mistakes in the passing game. If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way.The loss was a TEAM loss not all because of Favre as some like to point out. Sure he was trying to make something happen but the whole team failed around him.The packers are absolutely a better team with Favre at QB versus Rodgers. He's proven that this year by going into a brand new system and getting his team into good shape for the play-offs. Rodgers has practiced this offense for awhile now and has done a respectable job this year but I do not see him carrying a team the way Favre did right now. Rodgers is a slightly above average QB and if the rest of the team is sub-par or average the the Packers will be average.

Really? TT is the reason that Cullen Jenkins got hurt? Nick Barnett too?TT made Bigby miss Lance Moore the other night?TT made Pickett get worse? Wow.Sure, you can blame him for not resigning Corey Williams during the season last year...I have said that many times actually. Though, Corey has not really be lighting it up in Cleveland either while playing next to Rogers.I put blame on the players as well though. Several are simply not playing up to how they played last year on D. The line and LBs mainly. The secondary, prior to Monday, had been playing at an elite level.Good ol #4 was not the only reason that team was 13-3 last year either.And he threw more than one INT that game and was pretty off most of the game...as was Harris on Burress...as was the Oline, and IMO it was one of McCarthy's poorest called games from a coaching standpoint. I have never blamed just Favre for that game and won't start now.As for blaming Grant's run on the pick? Are you kidding? Had Favre just thrown the ball to the outside rather than the inside, it would have been a first down. It was a good read...but a bad throw. He threw it the one place he could not afford to miss. And it cost him and the team.And I agree...Rodgers is not carrying the team. Going into this year I did not expect him to or expect him to have to. The defense played so much better last year and what it looked like we would have had for a running game (which they have had the past few games), he should not have to do as much on his own. So far, that has not worked out as the D has not been good, punting has not helped them either...and the running game is just recently getting back on track.

You may want to see if you can go back and hear Colin Cowherds discussion yesterday about how a great QB improves and changes an entire team.

 

[sho nuff]

Excellent post, but do not expect shonuff to get a clue. He is blind when it comes to his packer homerism. Oh, and he will never admit to be wrong either. Kinda like the clueless GM in Green Bay. I hope TT stays there forever.

You do realize he took over a team that was 4-12 and in just 3 years built them back to a 13-3 team last year, right? How is your GM doing?So you're basically saying you would rather have Jerry Angelo than TT, Awesome

Keep on posting, it affirms my belief in the lack of common sense from most Bear fans.

Also, thanks for the laugh this morning. After Mondays debacle I needed a laugh.

Thompson didn't take over a team that was 4-12. He took over the team after the 2004 season... the Packers were 10-6 in 2004, 10-6 in 2003, 12-4 in 2002, and 12-4 in 2001, an overall run of 44-20, and they made the playoffs all 4 seasons. It was on Thompson's watch that it dropped to 4-12, and the team has an overall record of 30-29 in the four years since he took over. In the 13 seasons prior to Thompson taking over, the Packers did not have a losing season... now they will potentially have 2 losing seasons in 4 years under Thompson. And if they miss the playoffs this year, which seems likely, they will have made the playoffs only once during that span. Excuse me if I'm not as impressed as many of Thompson's supporters in this thread.Given that many Packers fans in this thread have both defended Thompson and said that Rodgers is not to blame for this year's dropoff, but instead the OL, DL, running game, injuries, etc. are to blame... what are Packers fans expecting for next year? Expecting to be back in the playoffs? I would translate that into expecting Ted to shore up the problems in the offseason... right? So what if the Packers miss the playoffs this year and next year? What will it take for Packers fans stop supporting Thompson?

And most real fans realize Thompson blew up the team in 2005...he made mistakes for sure...but that team was going to fall backwards no matter who took over...as Sherman left him with an old roster with little to no depth.We have said that Rodgers is not the main issue. Sure, there is some blame there...a dropoff at the position was expected. Not sure how many times you need to read that before you get it right.

sure, we expected them to be in the playoffs even this year. And will expect it next year too.

But now you are talking what ifs? How about this one. What will it take for the TT bashers to actually support the guy? Anything short of a SB win?

Exactly how small a drop-off did you expect from Rodgers? The passing game is what made the team go. To make the play-offs you would have to expect very little drop-off from a QB that has very little live game experience.If I remember right they were ranked top 3-5 in passing (where the drop-off would occur), 20 or lower in rushing (worse passing game really can't make this a lot better) but overall top 5 offense. The defense was slightly outside the top 10.

This year the running game should be about the same and the defense has dropped 5 spots or so. The biggest drop-off comes with the guy that is basically a rookie.

Seems expectations were a little high with a rookie to me.

The running game made them go pretty well too.How much of a dropoff...I had them 9-7 with a chance at 10-6 prior to the season.

Rushing was worse ranking because of how they started the year. Not because of how they ended it.

The defense was top 10 in points against (6th) and 11th in yards against.

The rush defense was far better last year...and while losing Corey Williams hurt his specialty was pass rush, not run stopping.

Dropped 5 spots or so? Try they are 22nd in points against and 17th in yards allowed.

 

[sho nuff]

Can we stop the lame "real packer fan" schtick.You can hate TT or love TT and still be a Packer fan. You can name two starters or 22 starters and still be a real Packer fan. Obviously people who supported getting rid of Favre arent going to want to admit that it was a bad move. Nobody likes to admit they were wrong. Technically you cant even say they are wrong yet. The season isnt over. Rodgers could blow up, Favre could go in the tank and TT would look like a genius. There is still plenty of season left. I hope the Packers can turn this around and squeak in. If they dont, it will be unfair to Rodgers. He seems like a good guy and looks like he will be a decent to very good QB. He will never win over the fans if the Packers miss the playoffs two years in a row after going 13-3 when everybody thought up was the only way this team was going(and I dont mean record wise as it is possible to be a better team and be 12-4). His contract would quickly be the only thing everybody talks about and how we miss the good ole days with Favre.

I have said Favre would be better for this year alone. In that, for this year, it was a bad move. Overall, in the big picture, I don't know yet. I support it as I think Favre brought alot of it on himself. TT is no saint and not innocent in it. I have maintained this stance the entire time. Nothing has changed.And nobody who is on the Favre side will admit that this team is more than Brett Favre away right now. They apparently can't admit to being wrong either.

Not getting it. Seems to me the seasoned vet could get it done in situations that a 1st year starter couldn't. Especially since the seasoned vet carried basically the same team deep into the play-offs last year.

Sure he could...but that seasoned vet could also not do as much as Rodgers can with his feet sometimes.And the team is a bit different from last year due to free agent losses, cuts, and injuries.

 

[J R]

So it was dismal in Green Bay before Favre arrived. And now, in the first season he is gone, the team has a losing record and will miss the playoffs. There are a lot of reasons for it, and QB play is certainly one of them IMO. I think Rodgers has played well, especially for a first year starter, and he has been better than I expected. But I think those that think there has been no dropoff from what it would have been had Favre stayed are wrong.

I think it's early to say that the team will miss the playoffs; they're only one game out of first and they're 3-1 in the division. I think it's fair to say that the team would have been better with Favre this year; what's not clear is whether the team would have been as good in 2009 and 2010 if they'd kept Favre starting in 2008.

Sorry, but you play for the upcoming year. You plan a year ahead knowing that plans change. Taking a 13-3 team and having the possibility of returning the same, or near the same, players the next year far outweighs what might happen in 2009 or 2010. You worry about 2009 when 2009 is here and not before 2008 even begins. All in all, a team should want their best team out there on day one. The NFL, players, and some fans know a team with Favre at QB versus a first year starter is going to be better 99% of the time. No way do I bet on the 1%.

Only problem is...GMs don't just think about the one year. Poor GMs might...but good ones don't.Im still waiting for any of you continuing this to show where anyone just thought they would be better with Rodgers this year?

Good GMs don't run a great QB out of town like TT did and the vast majority of executives in the NFL acknowledge that is what TT did with Favre. TT could have gone one more year with Favre AND Rodgers but TT didn't want to do that. That is the truth and the TT supporters WILL NEVER ACKNOWLEDGE THIS even though it is reported more and more by the NFL insiders.

That QB first left town on his own.Some of you act as if TT just told him to get out as soon as he got to town.And the vast majority of executives acknowledge that is what he did? Care to back that up with any substance like a link? I won't hold my breath.TT would have let him back had he never retired and done the I want to come back...no I don't routine. A fact that some of you will never acknowledge no matter how many people tell you its true.And I, and others have acknowledged that TT wanted to see what Rodgers could do and wanted to move on after last season...but they would have taken him back. That much is perfectly clear.

All facts,

They are not facts. Here is a fact.....Thompson didn't make one phone call or attempt to contact Favre prior to his retirement. That sure doesn't make it seem like Thompson was hoping for Favre to return. I also trust what Terry Bradshaw stated last week that it is widely known by NFL insiders that Thompson wanted Favre gone for two years. Others on ESPN have stated that as well. Why would Favre want to go back to GB knowing that Thompson didn't want him back?

Is the part about what Terry Bradshaw said about what "insiders' know a fact as well? Because it sure looks like speculation to me.

I'd be willing to bet that Bradshaw has insider connections that none of us have and I highly doubt he would make that claim without being able to back it up. It has been written about as well and Steve Mariucci has confirmed it as well. I don't know why the TT supporters can't acknowledge that he didn't want Favre back.

Being willing to bet that someone has connections and being relatively sure that he has evidence to back up his claim is still speculation. You don't bet on or highly doubt facts. You've gotta be kidding me that you take Terry Bradshaw as a knowledgeable source, let alone an unbiased one on this topic.

 

[sho nuff]

So it was dismal in Green Bay before Favre arrived. And now, in the first season he is gone, the team has a losing record and will miss the playoffs. There are a lot of reasons for it, and QB play is certainly one of them IMO. I think Rodgers has played well, especially for a first year starter, and he has been better than I expected. But I think those that think there has been no dropoff from what it would have been had Favre stayed are wrong.

I think it's early to say that the team will miss the playoffs; they're only one game out of first and they're 3-1 in the division. I think it's fair to say that the team would have been better with Favre this year; what's not clear is whether the team would have been as good in 2009 and 2010 if they'd kept Favre starting in 2008.

Sorry, but you play for the upcoming year. You plan a year ahead knowing that plans change. Taking a 13-3 team and having the possibility of returning the same, or near the same, players the next year far outweighs what might happen in 2009 or 2010. You worry about 2009 when 2009 is here and not before 2008 even begins. All in all, a team should want their best team out there on day one. The NFL, players, and some fans know a team with Favre at QB versus a first year starter is going to be better 99% of the time. No way do I bet on the 1%.

Only problem is...GMs don't just think about the one year. Poor GMs might...but good ones don't.Im still waiting for any of you continuing this to show where anyone just thought they would be better with Rodgers this year?

Good GMs don't run a great QB out of town like TT did and the vast majority of executives in the NFL acknowledge that is what TT did with Favre. TT could have gone one more year with Favre AND Rodgers but TT didn't want to do that. That is the truth and the TT supporters WILL NEVER ACKNOWLEDGE THIS even though it is reported more and more by the NFL insiders.

That QB first left town on his own.Some of you act as if TT just told him to get out as soon as he got to town.And the vast majority of executives acknowledge that is what he did? Care to back that up with any substance like a link? I won't hold my breath.TT would have let him back had he never retired and done the I want to come back...no I don't routine. A fact that some of you will never acknowledge no matter how many people tell you its true.And I, and others have acknowledged that TT wanted to see what Rodgers could do and wanted to move on after last season...but they would have taken him back. That much is perfectly clear.

All facts,

They are not facts. Here is a fact.....Thompson didn't make one phone call or attempt to contact Favre prior to his retirement. That sure doesn't make it seem like Thompson was hoping for Favre to return. I also trust what Terry Bradshaw stated last week that it is widely known by NFL insiders that Thompson wanted Favre gone for two years. Others on ESPN have stated that as well. Why would Favre want to go back to GB knowing that Thompson didn't want him back?

Who said he hoped Favre would return? Nobody is making that argument.And its gone from executives to insiders. Too funny.If Favre wanted to play...why would he not come back? If all he wanted to do was play...why retire?Seems like if someone wanted to say it was for spite, you are adding to the argument that it may have been Favre acting out of spite...not TT.

 

[sho nuff]

This sure seems like a GM that wants his QB back...

Jets quarterback Brett Favre sat down with some reporters in New York today and detailed the talks he had this off-season with Packers General Manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy.

It’s clear that Favre doesn’t have warm memories of either, especially Thompson.

In an amusing portion of his interview with the New York Post, Favre talks about the visit that Thompson made to his Mississippi home after the NFL draft. Favre said he thought they were going to talk about him potentially coming back, but instead they talked about an odd offer that Thompson made.

“Then he kind of gets quiet,” Favre said, recalling what Thompson said to him, “and says, ‘We want to do something special for you, and what do you think if we …’ and these were his words exactly, ‘dismantle your locker and send it to you.’

“I was like, ‘What the hell are you talking about?’ I was like, ‘Um, OK Ted, great.’

“He said, ‘It’s going to be your locker, we’ll send it to you. Now, it’s going to be in a box.’

“I’m thinking, ‘Way to get my ### out the door.’ That’s the craziest thing I’ve ever heard of. What the hell am I going to do with a locker? So I just said, ‘Oh, OK, Ted, that’s great.’”

http://www.packerforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=16218

Yup...way to just take Favre's recollection as 100% truth. Shocking that he might feel that way huh?As for the locker. It happened after people whined that it was still there and would do nothing but remind the players and Rodgers that he was not longer there.

IIRC the team was being criticized for leaving it there so long after he had retired even.

 

[sho nuff]

So it was dismal in Green Bay before Favre arrived. And now, in the first season he is gone, the team has a losing record and will miss the playoffs. There are a lot of reasons for it, and QB play is certainly one of them IMO. I think Rodgers has played well, especially for a first year starter, and he has been better than I expected. But I think those that think there has been no dropoff from what it would have been had Favre stayed are wrong.

I think it's early to say that the team will miss the playoffs; they're only one game out of first and they're 3-1 in the division. I think it's fair to say that the team would have been better with Favre this year; what's not clear is whether the team would have been as good in 2009 and 2010 if they'd kept Favre starting in 2008.

Sorry, but you play for the upcoming year. You plan a year ahead knowing that plans change. Taking a 13-3 team and having the possibility of returning the same, or near the same, players the next year far outweighs what might happen in 2009 or 2010. You worry about 2009 when 2009 is here and not before 2008 even begins. All in all, a team should want their best team out there on day one. The NFL, players, and some fans know a team with Favre at QB versus a first year starter is going to be better 99% of the time. No way do I bet on the 1%.

Only problem is...GMs don't just think about the one year. Poor GMs might...but good ones don't.Im still waiting for any of you continuing this to show where anyone just thought they would be better with Rodgers this year?

Good GMs don't run a great QB out of town like TT did and the vast majority of executives in the NFL acknowledge that is what TT did with Favre. TT could have gone one more year with Favre AND Rodgers but TT didn't want to do that. That is the truth and the TT supporters WILL NEVER ACKNOWLEDGE THIS even though it is reported more and more by the NFL insiders.

That QB first left town on his own.Some of you act as if TT just told him to get out as soon as he got to town.And the vast majority of executives acknowledge that is what he did? Care to back that up with any substance like a link? I won't hold my breath.TT would have let him back had he never retired and done the I want to come back...no I don't routine. A fact that some of you will never acknowledge no matter how many people tell you its true.And I, and others have acknowledged that TT wanted to see what Rodgers could do and wanted to move on after last season...but they would have taken him back. That much is perfectly clear.

All facts,

They are not facts. Here is a fact.....Thompson didn't make one phone call or attempt to contact Favre prior to his retirement. That sure doesn't make it seem like Thompson was hoping for Favre to return. I also trust what Terry Bradshaw stated last week that it is widely known by NFL insiders that Thompson wanted Favre gone for two years. Others on ESPN have stated that as well. Why would Favre want to go back to GB knowing that Thompson didn't want him back?

Is the part about what Terry Bradshaw said about what "insiders' know a fact as well? Because it sure looks like speculation to me.

I'd be willing to bet that Bradshaw has insider connections that none of us have and I highly doubt he would make that claim without being able to back it up. It has been written about as well and Steve Mariucci has confirmed it as well. I don't know why the TT supporters can't acknowledge that he didn't want Favre back.

They probably both read the McGinn article. Its not even being debated here.The point is not whether or not TT wanted him back anyway.If Favre just wanted to play for GB, he would not have retired or waffled over and over would he?He would not have been putting out trade feelers via his agent in April would he?McCarthy talked to him every single week from what I read.

 

[sho nuff]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

Again...an of you care to back up this "the real Packer fans" crap?Sorry, I have no jealousy based vendetta against Favre. What am I jealous of?I defended the guy for years and years...there is no vendetta at all.And the majority of fans both on message boards and just about every poll ever taken...do not agree that TT is as bad as you all are claiming.You simply have no facts to back that up.Sure...some of you will talk about people calling into talk radio....ever wonder why usually negative people call in?Heck...2 years ago people were calling in down here to get rid of Jeff Fisher...thats the extreme position people take when people who don't know as much about football as they think they do...call up to talk radio shows to complain because the team is not doing exactly what they want it to be doing.

It would seem to me that TT is the whole reason that the bad D, bad line, etc that you talk about is there. So no matter which side you look at it TT is at fault.Getting rid of #4 was a mistake. Good ol' 4 was one over-time game away from a super bowl on a 3 loss season. Sure he threw the Int in overtime but he was the offense. The rushing game put up a total of about 25-30 yds rushing. The only offense GB had was Favre passing. The giants were putting together good drives and won the TOP battle by about 2 to 1. The giants knew the Packers could not run and just had to find a way to force the mistakes in the passing game. If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way.The loss was a TEAM loss not all because of Favre as some like to point out. Sure he was trying to make something happen but the whole team failed around him.The packers are absolutely a better team with Favre at QB versus Rodgers. He's proven that this year by going into a brand new system and getting his team into good shape for the play-offs. Rodgers has practiced this offense for awhile now and has done a respectable job this year but I do not see him carrying a team the way Favre did right now. Rodgers is a slightly above average QB and if the rest of the team is sub-par or average the the Packers will be average.

Really? TT is the reason that Cullen Jenkins got hurt? Nick Barnett too?TT made Bigby miss Lance Moore the other night?TT made Pickett get worse? Wow.Sure, you can blame him for not resigning Corey Williams during the season last year...I have said that many times actually. Though, Corey has not really be lighting it up in Cleveland either while playing next to Rogers.I put blame on the players as well though. Several are simply not playing up to how they played last year on D. The line and LBs mainly. The secondary, prior to Monday, had been playing at an elite level.Good ol #4 was not the only reason that team was 13-3 last year either.And he threw more than one INT that game and was pretty off most of the game...as was Harris on Burress...as was the Oline, and IMO it was one of McCarthy's poorest called games from a coaching standpoint. I have never blamed just Favre for that game and won't start now.As for blaming Grant's run on the pick? Are you kidding? Had Favre just thrown the ball to the outside rather than the inside, it would have been a first down. It was a good read...but a bad throw. He threw it the one place he could not afford to miss. And it cost him and the team.And I agree...Rodgers is not carrying the team. Going into this year I did not expect him to or expect him to have to. The defense played so much better last year and what it looked like we would have had for a running game (which they have had the past few games), he should not have to do as much on his own. So far, that has not worked out as the D has not been good, punting has not helped them either...and the running game is just recently getting back on track.

You may want to see if you can go back and hear Colin Cowherds discussion yesterday about how a great QB improves and changes an entire team.

Why would I want to listen to one of the worst talk radio people out there? Why does his opinion somehow mean the Packers Dline would have played better? Or that the DBs would not have been toasted by the Saints the other night?Or somehow Jenkins and Barnett do not get hurt...I bet he would have kept Clifton from missing the Titans game too with illness.Fact is, Brett Favre would not make this defense better. He would not make Frost a better punter.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

When Jordan retired from the Bulls and then unretired he was welcomed back with open arms. Last year Strahan was welcomed back with open arms by the Giants.

Sometimes players get to points in their careers and they are just unsure if they want to continue playing. Matt Sundin is going through this same thing right now in the NHL.

Great players who have done a lot for a franchise are usually welcomed back, especially when they have come off of tremendous years and are still playing at an elite level and have many things to offer to a team.

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back. If older players hang on and are playing but their decline is hurting the team I could see wanting to push them out the door. But this was not the case with Favre. He felt slated by TT and I don't blame him one bit.

 

[J R]

I assume that part of this debate has to do with difference in team performance to date - but I have not read gone through all the posts and debating the soap opera narrative doesn't interest me. My question is this: How much can the difference in Green Bay's record be explained by SOS? In their division, the Vikings and Bears seem improved to me. And their nonconference schedule to date has included Dallas (the version with Romo), Tampa, Atlanta, Indy, Tennessee, and New Orleans, all teams with winning records.

Last year, GB played the teams who drafted in slots 2, 3, 4, 5 and 12, 13, 14, 15 in the draft (before trades). If I added that up right, they had 11 games against teams in the bottom half of the league. This year GB has already played 8 games against teams currently in the top half of the league.

 

[sho nuff]

When Jordan retired from the Bulls and then unretired he was welcomed back with open arms. Last year Strahan was welcomed back with open arms by the Giants.Sometimes players get to points in their careers and they are just unsure if they want to continue playing. Matt Sundin is going through this same thing right now in the NHL. Great players who have done a lot for a franchise are usually welcomed back, especially when they have come off of tremendous years and are still playing at an elite level and have many things to offer to a team. I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back. If older players hang on and are playing but their decline is hurting the team I could see wanting to push them out the door. But this was not the case with Favre. He felt slated by TT and I don't blame him one bit.

Did Jordan retire...than several times over the offseason say he wanted to come back only to waffle?While his agent put out trade feelers in April?Not really.Strahan did not either.Was he even retired before he came back last year? They were not pushing him out the door.They were not begging him...I think part of it is ego on both sides. Brett's ego needed to be stroked more and more done for him. TT did not do all that.TT'e ego in that he wants to see what Rodgers can do...but that was a decision he did not even make on his own.

 

[sho nuff]

I assume that part of this debate has to do with difference in team performance to date - but I have not read gone through all the posts and debating the soap opera narrative doesn't interest me. My question is this: How much can the difference in Green Bay's record be explained by SOS? In their division, the Vikings and Bears seem improved to me. And their nonconference schedule to date has included Dallas (the version with Romo), Tampa, Atlanta, Indy, Tennessee, and New Orleans, all teams with winning records.Last year, GB played the teams who drafted in slots 2, 3, 4, 5 and 12, 13, 14, 15 in the draft (before trades). If I added that up right, they had 11 games against teams in the bottom half of the league. This year GB has already played 8 games against teams currently in the top half of the league.

Much too logical for some.Also, GB was a pretty healthy team last year.This year their starting DE is gone for the season, then a few weeks ago they lost their starting MLB.One of their starting corners missed several games with a spleen.Starting safety missed time.Both tackles have missed time. The Center missed time.Their RB started the year hurt.Jones has missed several games.And they have a QB who is a first year starter.The dropoff was expected, the injuries and play of some others has definitely not helped.

 

[CalBear]

Great players who have done a lot for a franchise are usually welcomed back, especially when they have come off of tremendous years and are still playing at an elite level and have many things to offer to a team.

Hmm, I thought Jordan finished his career in a blue uniform. Montana finished in Kansas City. Rice went to Oakland and then to Seattle. Emmitt Smith went to Arizona.

 

[Challenge Everything]

217 = 25%

 

[ScottyFargo]

I might have changed my mind on this issue. Last year the Packers couldn't beat the strong teams, and they stayed consistent there after the switch. It isn't Rodgers/Favre, it's that the Packers were overachievers last year.

I am sure Favre will send TT a Christmas card for sending him to a situation where he could be effective.

 

[Phase of the Game]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

Great players who have done a lot for a franchise are usually welcomed back, especially when they have come off of tremendous years and are still playing at an elite level and have many things to offer to a team.

Hmm, I thought Jordan finished his career in a blue uniform. Montana finished in Kansas City. Rice went to Oakland and then to Seattle. Emmitt Smith went to Arizona.

Jordan's was his own decision therefore he was not pushed out the door.Montana as outlined already was a totally different circumstance due to injury.Rice/Smith were not playing at an elite level on winning teams. Nobody cared that they were losing these guys as they were no longer helping their teams win.

 

[sho nuff]

217 = 25%

Thanks for the pointless update.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Great players who have done a lot for a franchise are usually welcomed back, especially when they have come off of tremendous years and are still playing at an elite level and have many things to offer to a team.

Hmm, I thought Jordan finished his career in a blue uniform. Montana finished in Kansas City. Rice went to Oakland and then to Seattle. Emmitt Smith went to Arizona.

Jordan's was his own decision therefore he was not pushed out the door.Montana as outlined already was a totally different circumstance due to injury.



Rice/Smith were not playing at an elite level on winning teams. Nobody cared that they were losing these guys as they were no longer helping their teams win.

NFC Championship to traded, with a small stop at retired in between. How did that erase what he did last season? Unbelievable.

 

[sho nuff]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.That simply was not the case.

 

[ScottyFargo]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.

If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.

That simply was not the case.

He wanted back to the team he already knew inside and out and lived for a decade and a half... it is unacceptable to say that the team moved on in the months that he had been retired. He still had enough time in the offseason to learn enough about the Jets offense to get him by until they could start clicking for the second half of the season against some of the leagues toughest teams.

 

[Phurfur]

I see that allot of you agree with Tony Kornheiser on this issue, the rset agree with Jaws. This thread is as stupid as their MNF arguement.

 

[Phase of the Game]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.That simply was not the case.

WRONG! What simply is the case is that Thompson didn't want Favre back and that made it difficult for Favre to give his committment to them knowing that Thompson didn't want him back. Favre was pushed into a decision in March and he wasn't ready to make one. THOMPSON NEVER CONTACTED FAVRE PRIOR TO THE RETIREMENT TO EXPRESS HIS INTEREST IN HAVING HIM BACK. Quit trying to spin this.

 

[zDragon]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

Again...an of you care to back up this "the real Packer fans" crap?Sorry, I have no jealousy based vendetta against Favre. What am I jealous of?

I defended the guy for years and years...there is no vendetta at all.

And the majority of fans both on message boards and just about every poll ever taken...do not agree that TT is as bad as you all are claiming.

You simply have no facts to back that up.

Sure...some of you will talk about people calling into talk radio....ever wonder why usually negative people call in?

Heck...2 years ago people were calling in down here to get rid of Jeff Fisher...thats the extreme position people take when people who don't know as much about football as they think they do...call up to talk radio shows to complain because the team is not doing exactly what they want it to be doing.

It would seem to me that TT is the whole reason that the bad D, bad line, etc that you talk about is there. So no matter which side you look at it TT is at fault.Getting rid of #4 was a mistake. Good ol' 4 was one over-time game away from a super bowl on a 3 loss season.

Sure he threw the Int in overtime but he was the offense. The rushing game put up a total of about 25-30 yds rushing. The only offense GB had was Favre passing. The giants were putting together good drives and won the TOP battle by about 2 to 1. The giants knew the Packers could not run and just had to find a way to force the mistakes in the passing game.

If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way.

The loss was a TEAM loss not all because of Favre as some like to point out. Sure he was trying to make something happen but the whole team failed around him.

The packers are absolutely a better team with Favre at QB versus Rodgers. He's proven that this year by going into a brand new system and getting his team into good shape for the play-offs. Rodgers has practiced this offense for awhile now and has done a respectable job this year but I do not see him carrying a team the way Favre did right now. Rodgers is a slightly above average QB and if the rest of the team is sub-par or average the the Packers will be average.

Really? TT is the reason that Cullen Jenkins got hurt? Nick Barnett too?TT made Bigby miss Lance Moore the other night?

TT made Pickett get worse? Wow.

Sure, you can blame him for not resigning Corey Williams during the season last year...I have said that many times actually. Though, Corey has not really be lighting it up in Cleveland either while playing next to Rogers.

I put blame on the players as well though. Several are simply not playing up to how they played last year on D. The line and LBs mainly. The secondary, prior to Monday, had been playing at an elite level.

Good ol #4 was not the only reason that team was 13-3 last year either.

And he threw more than one INT that game and was pretty off most of the game...as was Harris on Burress...as was the Oline, and IMO it was one of McCarthy's poorest called games from a coaching standpoint. I have never blamed just Favre for that game and won't start now.

As for blaming Grant's run on the pick? Are you kidding? Had Favre just thrown the ball to the outside rather than the inside, it would have been a first down. It was a good read...but a bad throw. He threw it the one place he could not afford to miss. And it cost him and the team.

And I agree...Rodgers is not carrying the team. Going into this year I did not expect him to or expect him to have to. The defense played so much better last year and what it looked like we would have had for a running game (which they have had the past few games), he should not have to do as much on his own. So far, that has not worked out as the D has not been good, punting has not helped them either...and the running game is just recently getting back on track.

1. Injuries happen I never blamed that on TT. I'm assuming based off your statement the Packers did not deal with injuries last year so it was easier on the team.2. The defense is an average D this year and was only slightly above average last year. I'd have to look but the average per game does not seem to be more than 3-5 points per game.

3. Of course he was not the only reason but a large part of it. The running game was below average last year and has actually improved slightly this year.

4. I stand by my statement "If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way". Once you take the running game away the mistakes will come on offense it is only a matter of time. Overtime just made this worse especially when the D is giving up big drives.

5. So far this year the running game has been slightly better.

6. The biggest drop-off in the stats I have seen are with the passing game.

I'm looking at this open-minded. I could care less about Favre or Rodgers but if you wanted to make a play-off run and super-bowl run you needed Favre not Rodgers. Long term I still am not sold on Rodgers being anything more than you average to slightly above average QB. He needs a team around him.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

217 = 25%

:(

 

[sho nuff]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.

If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.

That simply was not the case.

He wanted back to the team he already knew inside and out and lived for a decade and a half... it is unacceptable to say that the team moved on in the months that he had been retired. He still had enough time in the offseason to learn enough about the Jets offense to get him by until they could start clicking for the second half of the season against some of the leagues toughest teams.

When he retired...and told them several times he was staying retired...yes, they moved on. They had to. He forced their hand in that.

 

[Phurfur]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.That simply was not the case.

WRONG! What simply is the case is that Thompson didn't want Favre back and that made it difficult for Favre to give his committment to them knowing that Thompson didn't want him back. Favre was pushed into a decision in March and he wasn't ready to make one. THOMPSON NEVER CONTACTED FAVRE PRIOR TO THE RETIREMENT TO EXPRESS HIS INTEREST IN HAVING HIM BACK. Quit trying to spin this. :(

As a Packer Fan, I went through this for 4 years with Favre, it was time to get some stability back in the franchise. If Favre hadn't been talking about retiring Rodgers wouldn't even be on the team. Favre played the game and he got what he wanted, out of GB. I think getting a 1 or 2 round draft choice for a guy that didn't want to play for you is a good move.The NYJ can worry if he will come back next year. For the record I think Favre will say he is returning right away and not make NY wait like he did with GB for 4 years.

 

[sho nuff]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.That simply was not the case.

WRONG! What simply is the case is that Thompson didn't want Favre back and that made it difficult for Favre to give his committment to them knowing that Thompson didn't want him back. Favre was pushed into a decision in March and he wasn't ready to make one. THOMPSON NEVER CONTACTED FAVRE PRIOR TO THE RETIREMENT TO EXPRESS HIS INTEREST IN HAVING HIM BACK. Quit trying to spin this.

Made it difficult?How so?How difficult in March was it for Favre to commit to the team?Whether the GM wants him or not, it has little to do with how he could not commit to the team then or in the coming months.Why did it take til late June?He was pushed so the team could prepare to be with him or without him...hardly an unreasonable expectation.Great...TT never did...so what? McCarthy did often. Why does TT need to call him begging?Spin? What have I spun? You simply cannot even find something Im spinning.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.That simply was not the case.

WRONG! What simply is the case is that Thompson didn't want Favre back and that made it difficult for Favre to give his committment to them knowing that Thompson didn't want him back. Favre was pushed into a decision in March and he wasn't ready to make one. THOMPSON NEVER CONTACTED FAVRE PRIOR TO THE RETIREMENT TO EXPRESS HIS INTEREST IN HAVING HIM BACK. Quit trying to spin this.

Favre played the game and he got what he wanted, out of GB. I

Favre never wanted out of Green Bay.

 

[zDragon]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.That simply was not the case.

WRONG! What simply is the case is that Thompson didn't want Favre back and that made it difficult for Favre to give his committment to them knowing that Thompson didn't want him back. Favre was pushed into a decision in March and he wasn't ready to make one. THOMPSON NEVER CONTACTED FAVRE PRIOR TO THE RETIREMENT TO EXPRESS HIS INTEREST IN HAVING HIM BACK. Quit trying to spin this.

Favre played the game and he got what he wanted, out of GB. I

Favre never wanted out of Green Bay.

How can we be sure what actually happened? I say favre wanted to play but who knows.

 

[Phase of the Game]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.That simply was not the case.

WRONG! What simply is the case is that Thompson didn't want Favre back and that made it difficult for Favre to give his committment to them knowing that Thompson didn't want him back. Favre was pushed into a decision in March and he wasn't ready to make one. THOMPSON NEVER CONTACTED FAVRE PRIOR TO THE RETIREMENT TO EXPRESS HIS INTEREST IN HAVING HIM BACK. Quit trying to spin this.

Made it difficult?How so?How difficult in March was it for Favre to commit to the team?Whether the GM wants him or not, it has little to do with how he could not commit to the team then or in the coming months.Why did it take til late June?He was pushed so the team could prepare to be with him or without him...hardly an unreasonable expectation.Great...TT never did...so what? McCarthy did often. Why does TT need to call him begging?Spin? What have I spun? You simply cannot even find something Im spinning.

Your entire post above is spin. Trying to take the blame away from your boy TT and point it at Favre. Pathetic.Lastly on your idiotic comment that "Whether the GM wants him or not, it has little to do with how he could not commit to the team then or in the coming months."It has everything to do with Favre committing since Favre KNEW TT didn't want him back. It made it very difficult to committ in that situation. TT wanted to send Favre's locker to him ! You are just a joke! I'm done with you today because I can't believe the garbage coming from you.

 

[sho nuff]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

Again...an of you care to back up this "the real Packer fans" crap?Sorry, I have no jealousy based vendetta against Favre. What am I jealous of?

I defended the guy for years and years...there is no vendetta at all.

And the majority of fans both on message boards and just about every poll ever taken...do not agree that TT is as bad as you all are claiming.

You simply have no facts to back that up.

Sure...some of you will talk about people calling into talk radio....ever wonder why usually negative people call in?

Heck...2 years ago people were calling in down here to get rid of Jeff Fisher...thats the extreme position people take when people who don't know as much about football as they think they do...call up to talk radio shows to complain because the team is not doing exactly what they want it to be doing.

It would seem to me that TT is the whole reason that the bad D, bad line, etc that you talk about is there. So no matter which side you look at it TT is at fault.Getting rid of #4 was a mistake. Good ol' 4 was one over-time game away from a super bowl on a 3 loss season.

Sure he threw the Int in overtime but he was the offense. The rushing game put up a total of about 25-30 yds rushing. The only offense GB had was Favre passing. The giants were putting together good drives and won the TOP battle by about 2 to 1. The giants knew the Packers could not run and just had to find a way to force the mistakes in the passing game.

If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way.

The loss was a TEAM loss not all because of Favre as some like to point out. Sure he was trying to make something happen but the whole team failed around him.

The packers are absolutely a better team with Favre at QB versus Rodgers. He's proven that this year by going into a brand new system and getting his team into good shape for the play-offs. Rodgers has practiced this offense for awhile now and has done a respectable job this year but I do not see him carrying a team the way Favre did right now. Rodgers is a slightly above average QB and if the rest of the team is sub-par or average the the Packers will be average.

Really? TT is the reason that Cullen Jenkins got hurt? Nick Barnett too?TT made Bigby miss Lance Moore the other night?

TT made Pickett get worse? Wow.

Sure, you can blame him for not resigning Corey Williams during the season last year...I have said that many times actually. Though, Corey has not really be lighting it up in Cleveland either while playing next to Rogers.

I put blame on the players as well though. Several are simply not playing up to how they played last year on D. The line and LBs mainly. The secondary, prior to Monday, had been playing at an elite level.

Good ol #4 was not the only reason that team was 13-3 last year either.

And he threw more than one INT that game and was pretty off most of the game...as was Harris on Burress...as was the Oline, and IMO it was one of McCarthy's poorest called games from a coaching standpoint. I have never blamed just Favre for that game and won't start now.

As for blaming Grant's run on the pick? Are you kidding? Had Favre just thrown the ball to the outside rather than the inside, it would have been a first down. It was a good read...but a bad throw. He threw it the one place he could not afford to miss. And it cost him and the team.

And I agree...Rodgers is not carrying the team. Going into this year I did not expect him to or expect him to have to. The defense played so much better last year and what it looked like we would have had for a running game (which they have had the past few games), he should not have to do as much on his own. So far, that has not worked out as the D has not been good, punting has not helped them either...and the running game is just recently getting back on track.

1. Injuries happen I never blamed that on TT. I'm assuming based off your statement the Packers did not deal with injuries last year so it was easier on the team.2. The defense is an average D this year and was only slightly above average last year. I'd have to look but the average per game does not seem to be more than 3-5 points per game.

3. Of course he was not the only reason but a large part of it. The running game was below average last year and has actually improved slightly this year.

4. I stand by my statement "If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way". Once you take the running game away the mistakes will come on offense it is only a matter of time. Overtime just made this worse especially when the D is giving up big drives.

5. So far this year the running game has been slightly better.

6. The biggest drop-off in the stats I have seen are with the passing game.

I'm looking at this open-minded. I could care less about Favre or Rodgers but if you wanted to make a play-off run and super-bowl run you needed Favre not Rodgers. Long term I still am not sold on Rodgers being anything more than you average to slightly above average QB. He needs a team around him.

1. They did not have near the impactful injuries last year that they have this year.2. The difference is the D just can't seem to get off the field. They are very poor against the run.

3. The running game was below average to start the season...they got progressively better and were much improved once Grant was starting.

4. If Grant had busted alot of other runs things would not be needed. Again, that game was not lost because of just Favre, I have never said it was. But the fact remains Grant did not bust a big run and he made a poor pass.

5. On average from last year...yes, as compared to the last 8 games last year? No, the running game is worse until recently.

6. You are not looking close enough at the D IMO.

IMO, to just make a playoff run was not enough to keep Favre. Anything short of a SB win, which was a long shot even with Faver, would have been a failure IMO.

All QBs need a team around them...even Favre.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=35...&type=story

Packers make their choice with Favre; now they can wallow in it

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Gene Wojciechowski

ESPN.com

From green and gold to green and white. From, "Go, Pack, Go" to "J-E-T-S." From the NFL's smallest market to the league's largest.

Brett Favre's life did a 180 late Wednesday night, and it happened because Green Bay Packers general manager Ted Thompson didn't trust Favre, and Favre didn't trust Thompson.

Drag a razor across this controversy's beard and that's what you'll find under the stubble -- distrust, too much scar tissue and the simple yet mind-boggling fact that Packers management thinks Favre isn't good enough to win. If it thought otherwise, Favre wouldn't be the quarterback of the New York Jets today.

Anyway, so much for the Packers wanting to protect Favre's "legacy." Remember that bit of PR fiction? The benevolent, caring Packers would be there to safeguard all things Brett -- that's what they said often in recent weeks. But the protection broke down when Favre decided to unretire and return to Green Bay.

Favre is a Jet because Thompson didn't want him to be a Packer. Or a Minnesota Viking. And who can forget that heartfelt "crossing the Rubicon" statement by Packers team president Mark Murphy when Favre was reinstated by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. Any icier and you could have played hockey on it.

Brett Favre as he left Green Bay...ultimately for the last time as a Packer.

For all those Favre critics who insist he's a drama queen, remember that he could have stayed in Green Bay, practiced, competed in an open competition with Aaron Rodgers and dared Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy to keep him on the bench. But he didn't. He left after several days because he has more respect for the Packers than the Packers have for him.

Packers management thought Favre wouldn't push for reinstatement and report to camp, but he did. It thought he would take its $25 million of get-lost money, but he didn't. It thought it could break his will by refusing to release him or trade him to the Vikings, but it couldn't.

And nice job on accusing the Vikings of tampering (the Vikes were cleared of any wrongdoing). Plus, wasn't it interesting that someone leaked a story that Favre allegedly called the Vikings on a Packers-issued cell phone (also untrue).

If this were a divorce, then Favre would be the one getting the alimony. The Packers were so eager to ditch the NFL's all-time leader in passing yards, touchdowns and victories by a QB that they reduced the bidding war to two teams (the Jets and Tampa Bay Buccaneers). And they settled for a conditional fourth-round pick, which will bump up to a third-rounder if Favre takes 50 percent of the snaps (duh), and a second-rounder if he takes 70 percent of the snaps and the Jets reach the playoffs.

Instead of Favre -- who earlier last season helped lead the Packers to the NFC Championship Game and finished second in the league's MVP voting -- Thompson would rather have three quarterbacks on his roster with a combined zero NFL starts. He'd rather have Rodgers than the most durable quarterback in the history of the game.

Why? It isn't just because Favre wanted to unretire. It can't be. It has to be something as fundamental as Thompson (and maybe McCarthy, too) having lost faith in Favre's ability to win games. If so, Thompson miscalculated yet again.

Thompson's future now depends on Rodgers. If Rodgers gets hurt, the Packers are done. If Rodgers can't handle the pressure, the Packers are done. And Thompson with them.

Of the two finalists for Favre, the Jets actually made the most sense. The Buccaneers already have Jeff Garcia, who made the Pro Bowl last season. Meanwhile, the Jets are underwhelmed by Chad Pennington, who is minutes away from getting released because of his $6 million salary, and Kellen Clemens.

The Jets spent $140 million during the offseason on players. They upgraded their offensive line by signing guard Alan Faneca, who will fit in nicely on the left side with tackle D'Brickashaw Ferguson. They upgraded their defensive line (nose tackle Kris Jenkins). They have Thomas Jones at running back (1,119 yards last season). They have Laveranues Coles at wide receiver.

Yes, they're in the same division as the New England Patriots. But they're also in the same division as the Miami Dolphins and the Buffalo Bills. They play Oakland, Kansas City, St. Louis and San Francisco. A nine-win season, maybe a game better, isn't inconceivable. At least, not any more inconceivable than Favre in New York.

It will be strange to see Favre in a Jets helmet. It would have been strange to see him in any helmet that didn't have the game's best logo -- that classic G -- on the side.

On the Jets' Web site, you can already purchase a Favre replica jersey for $80. There's also a tortured headline that reads, "DO QB-LIEVE IT? BRETT FAVRE IS A JET."

No, I don't believe it. Not because he's a Jet, but because Thompson just traded the best quarterback on his roster.

"It is with some sadness that we make this announcement, but also with the desire for certainty that will allow us to move the team and organization forward in the most positive way possible," Murphy and Thompson said in a joint statement.

Sadness? Thompson never wanted Favre back to begin with. Plus, the Packers got a draft pick out of it, they saved $25 million in bribe money, and they're still selling Favre jerseys for $179.95. So enough already with the fake sadness thing.

But if I'm a Packers fan, I fly my team flag at half-mast today. Or better yet, raise a Jets flag.

They're only $20 at Jets Shop.

 

[sho nuff]

I think the biggest problem here is GB has wanted Favre to retire more so then ever wanting him back.

A concept that some TT supporters refuse to accept.

A concept that people simply are not arguing anyway.TT could not want him back all he wants. Other than trading him or cutting him, TT could not do anything had Favre not retired.If Favre wanted back then, or several others times...he would be there.That simply was not the case.

WRONG! What simply is the case is that Thompson didn't want Favre back and that made it difficult for Favre to give his committment to them knowing that Thompson didn't want him back. Favre was pushed into a decision in March and he wasn't ready to make one. THOMPSON NEVER CONTACTED FAVRE PRIOR TO THE RETIREMENT TO EXPRESS HIS INTEREST IN HAVING HIM BACK. Quit trying to spin this.

Made it difficult?How so?How difficult in March was it for Favre to commit to the team?Whether the GM wants him or not, it has little to do with how he could not commit to the team then or in the coming months.Why did it take til late June?He was pushed so the team could prepare to be with him or without him...hardly an unreasonable expectation.Great...TT never did...so what? McCarthy did often. Why does TT need to call him begging?Spin? What have I spun? You simply cannot even find something Im spinning.

Your entire post above is spin. Trying to take the blame away from your boy TT and point it at Favre. Pathetic.Lastly on your idiotic comment that "Whether the GM wants him or not, it has little to do with how he could not commit to the team then or in the coming months."It has everything to do with Favre committing since Favre KNEW TT didn't want him back. It made it very difficult to committ in that situation. TT wanted to send Favre's locker to him ! You are just a joke! I'm done with you today because I can't believe the garbage coming from you.

The problem is you are calling facts spin.Favre did retire. That is a fact. Its not spin that TT could not do anything other than cut or trade him if he really did not want him back. Favre was under contract...as long as he wanted to play, he could have come back..he chose to retire.What is pathetic is that you still can't see that.My idiotic comment? If Favre wanted to commit to the team...why would it matter if the GM did not want him? What effect would that have on Favre on a day to day basis with the team? How much do you think Favre would give a damn if TT wanted him if he was the starting QB of the Green Bay Packers? Favre retired...what else should they do with his locker? Seriously, as I said, people were complaining that it was just still there. So TT did something about it. Thats not spin, that is how things went down. Its not like TT sent it to him in February.TT would have been comitting to the coaches and his teammates...not to TT. But thanks again for just making it personal and calling my comment idiotic...and garbage and calling me a joke.The only thing pathetic is your continued insistence that its all TT's fault and nothing more.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

This quote always amuses me when sho nuff tries and convinces himself that TT and McCarthy wanted Favre back.

Favre called McCarthy on June 20 and told him that he wanted to come back.

"When he picked up the phone again after he dropped it, he said, 'Oh, God, Brett. You're putting us in a tight spot,'" Favre said. "He said, 'Brett, playing here is not an option.' Those were his exact, exact words."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3561440

 

[sho nuff]

This quote always amuses me when sho nuff tries and convinces himself that TT and McCarthy wanted Favre back.

Favre called McCarthy on June 20 and told him that he wanted to come back.

"When he picked up the phone again after he dropped it, he said, 'Oh, God, Brett. You're putting us in a tight spot,'" Favre said. "He said, 'Brett, playing here is not an option.' Those were his exact, exact words."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3561440

What amuses me is that you keep claiming I am saying TT and McC wanted him back in June and that TT and McC would have been fine with him coming back in March.Also...a quote in June has nothing to do with what was going on in March and April now does it/

Thanks for again providing a quote that does not disprove a thing I, or several others have been saying.

And I say several others because you and phase act as if I am the only saying these things and support the Packers side of this in any way (which is far from the truth).

 

[Ookie Pringle]

This quote always amuses me when sho nuff tries and convinces himself that TT and McCarthy wanted Favre back.

Favre called McCarthy on June 20 and told him that he wanted to come back.

"When he picked up the phone again after he dropped it, he said, 'Oh, God, Brett. You're putting us in a tight spot,'" Favre said. "He said, 'Brett, playing here is not an option.' Those were his exact, exact words."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3561440

What amuses me is that you keep claiming I am saying TT and McC wanted him back in June and that TT and McC would have been fine with him coming back in March.Also...a quote in June has nothing to do with what was going on in March and April now does it/

Thanks for again providing a quote that does not disprove a thing I, or several others have been saying.

And I say several others because you and phase act as if I am the only saying these things and support the Packers side of this in any way (which is far from the truth).

The quote proves you wrong again when you make comments that if Favre wanted to play for the Packers he would be there. Now I await your 300+ words rebuttal.

 

[teamroc]

This quote always amuses me when sho nuff tries and convinces himself that TT and McCarthy wanted Favre back.

Favre called McCarthy on June 20 and told him that he wanted to come back.

"When he picked up the phone again after he dropped it, he said, 'Oh, God, Brett. You're putting us in a tight spot,'" Favre said. "He said, 'Brett, playing here is not an option.' Those were his exact, exact words."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3561440

What amuses me is that you keep claiming I am saying TT and McC wanted him back in June and that TT and McC would have been fine with him coming back in March.Also...a quote in June has nothing to do with what was going on in March and April now does it/

Thanks for again providing a quote that does not disprove a thing I, or several others have been saying.

And I say several others because you and phase act as if I am the only saying these things and support the Packers side of this in any way (which is far from the truth).

What do the dates matter?It was BEFORE training camp. He knew the offense. Favre could have slipped right back in June 20th, and it wouldn't have been an issue. TT felt like they had moved on, and that was the end of it.

I'm not sure what the debate is. Favre wanted to come back in June, TT said no, and that was it.

Strahan came back in late AUGUST and was welcomed back. And won them a SB. Favre un-retiring in late June was not a big deal.

 

[Kleck]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

One of the guys I hunt with said something similar last weekend, and that he is a real Packer fan and this whole thing is a total disgrace to Favre.When I asked him who he would root for if the Packers played the Jets, he replied with "the Jets".

 

[zDragon]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

Again...an of you care to back up this "the real Packer fans" crap?Sorry, I have no jealousy based vendetta against Favre. What am I jealous of?

I defended the guy for years and years...there is no vendetta at all.

And the majority of fans both on message boards and just about every poll ever taken...do not agree that TT is as bad as you all are claiming.

You simply have no facts to back that up.

Sure...some of you will talk about people calling into talk radio....ever wonder why usually negative people call in?

Heck...2 years ago people were calling in down here to get rid of Jeff Fisher...thats the extreme position people take when people who don't know as much about football as they think they do...call up to talk radio shows to complain because the team is not doing exactly what they want it to be doing.

It would seem to me that TT is the whole reason that the bad D, bad line, etc that you talk about is there. So no matter which side you look at it TT is at fault.Getting rid of #4 was a mistake. Good ol' 4 was one over-time game away from a super bowl on a 3 loss season.

Sure he threw the Int in overtime but he was the offense. The rushing game put up a total of about 25-30 yds rushing. The only offense GB had was Favre passing. The giants were putting together good drives and won the TOP battle by about 2 to 1. The giants kn

ew the Packers could not run and just had to find a way to force the mistakes in the passing game.

If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way.

The loss was a TEAM loss not all because of Favre as some like to point out. Sure he was trying to make something happen but the whole team failed around him.

The packers are absolutely a better team with Favre at QB versus Rodgers. He's proven that this year by going into a brand new system and getting his team into good shape for the play-offs. Rodgers has practiced this offense for awhile now and has done a respectable job this year but I do not see him carrying a team the way Favre did right now. Rodgers is a slightly above average QB and if the rest of the team is sub-par or average the the Packers will be average.

Really? TT is the reason that Cullen Jenkins got hurt? Nick Barnett too?TT made Bigby miss Lance Moore the other night?

TT made Pickett get worse? Wow.

Sure, you can blame him for not resigning Corey Williams during the season last year...I have said that many times actually. Though, Corey has not really be lighting it up in Cleveland either while playing next to Rogers.

I put blame on the players as well though. Several are simply not playing up to how they played last year on D. The line and LBs mainly. The secondary, prior to Monday, had been playing at an elite level.

Good ol #4 was not the only reason that team was 13-3 last year either.

And he threw more than one INT that game and was pretty off most of the game...as was Harris on Burress...as was the Oline, and IMO it was one of McCarthy's poorest called games from a coaching standpoint. I have never blamed just Favre for that game and won't start now.

As for blaming Grant's run on the pick? Are you kidding? Had Favre just thrown the ball to the outside rather than the inside, it would have been a first down. It was a good read...but a bad throw. He threw it the one place he could not afford to miss. And it cost him and the team.

And I agree...Rodgers is not carrying the team. Going into this year I did not expect him to or expect him to have to. The defense played so much better last year and what it looked like we would have had for a running game (which they have had the past few games), he should not have to do as much on his own. So far, that has not worked out as the D has not been good, punting has not helped them either...and the running game is just recently getting back on track.

1. Injuries happen I never blamed that on TT. I'm assuming based off your statement the Packers did not deal with injuries last year so it was easier on the team.2. The defense is an average D this year and was only slightly above average last year. I'd have to look but the average per game does not seem to be more than 3-5 points per game.

3. Of course he was not the only reason but a large part of it. The running game was below average last year and has actually improved slightly this year.

4. I stand by my statement "If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way". Once you take the running game away the mistakes will come on offense it is only a matter of time. Overtime just made this worse especially when the D is giving up big drives.

5. So far this year the running game has been slightly better.

6. The biggest drop-off in the stats I have seen are with the passing game.

I'm looking at this open-minded. I could care less about Favre or Rodgers but if you wanted to make a play-off run and super-bowl run you needed Favre not Rodgers. Long term I still am not sold on Rodgers being anything more than you average to slightly above average QB. He needs a team around him.

1. They did not have near the impactful injuries last year that they have this year.2. The difference is the D just can't seem to get off the field. They are very poor against the run.

3. The running game was below average to start the season...they got progressively better and were much improved once Grant was starting.

4. If Grant had busted alot of other runs things would not be needed. Again, that game was not lost because of just Favre, I have never said it was. But the fact remains Grant did not bust a big run and he made a poor pass.

5. On average from last year...yes, as compared to the last 8 games last year? No, the running game is worse until recently.

6. You are not looking close enough at the D IMO.

IMO, to just make a playoff run was not enough tohttp://www.imdb.com/media/rm2081134080/tt0800080 keep Favre. Anything short of a SB win, which was a long shot even with Faver, would have been a failure IMO.

All QBs need a team around them...even Favre.

1. I would throw this in the slight negative bin over last year but looking at the team as a whole they have coped well. 2. The defense has been playing at an elite level as you stated about the secondary. I think a lot of that is the impression they are on the field a lot. I don't have TOP stats but scoring wise I would think they are close to last year in what they have given up. Especially if you look at the fact they only scored 4 times all of last year. Could be 1-2 point per game difference? Of course I'm gong from memory so I could be wrong.

3. The running game has improved and at an already 10yd per game differnce we can throw it out as an issue from last year to this year.

4. So we can drop how bad the running game was and see it would have been an improvement for favre this year.

5. See 4 we can throw this out from last year to this year.

6. I think the D is equal if not more explosive than last year. Basically the scoring they have done equals out the few extra points (3-5) a game they are given up.

7. Maybe the D is on the field longer since the passing game is getting 50yd per game less and possibly the 1st down % of the offense is lower because of the new starter.

8. How much does the play calling change with a unseasoned QB in hurt the defense also?\

The drop seems to be in the QB position and some key injuries as you have pointed out which would be hard to equate from year to year.

 

[sho nuff]

This quote always amuses me when sho nuff tries and convinces himself that TT and McCarthy wanted Favre back.

Favre called McCarthy on June 20 and told him that he wanted to come back.

"When he picked up the phone again after he dropped it, he said, 'Oh, God, Brett. You're putting us in a tight spot,'" Favre said. "He said, 'Brett, playing here is not an option.' Those were his exact, exact words."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3561440

What amuses me is that you keep claiming I am saying TT and McC wanted him back in June and that TT and McC would have been fine with him coming back in March.Also...a quote in June has nothing to do with what was going on in March and April now does it/

Thanks for again providing a quote that does not disprove a thing I, or several others have been saying.

And I say several others because you and phase act as if I am the only saying these things and support the Packers side of this in any way (which is far from the truth).

The quote proves you wrong again when you make comments that if Favre wanted to play for the Packers he would be there. Now I await your 300+ words rebuttal.

The quote proves that on June 20th it was not an option.It does nothing to even address my position that TT and McC would have welcomed him back in March and April.

That you think it does is not really surprising.

I clearly stated if he wanted to play for him he would not have retired or waffled. Just like I clearly stated earlier in this thread that "the way Favre was playing" I did not think the team would have been better off.

Simply things you continue to miss in order to keep arguing.

 

[sho nuff]

This quote always amuses me when sho nuff tries and convinces himself that TT and McCarthy wanted Favre back.

Favre called McCarthy on June 20 and told him that he wanted to come back.

"When he picked up the phone again after he dropped it, he said, 'Oh, God, Brett. You're putting us in a tight spot,'" Favre said. "He said, 'Brett, playing here is not an option.' Those were his exact, exact words."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3561440

What amuses me is that you keep claiming I am saying TT and McC wanted him back in June and that TT and McC would have been fine with him coming back in March.Also...a quote in June has nothing to do with what was going on in March and April now does it/

Thanks for again providing a quote that does not disprove a thing I, or several others have been saying.

And I say several others because you and phase act as if I am the only saying these things and support the Packers side of this in any way (which is far from the truth).

What do the dates matter?It was BEFORE training camp. He knew the offense. Favre could have slipped right back in June 20th, and it wouldn't have been an issue. TT felt like they had moved on, and that was the end of it.

I'm not sure what the debate is. Favre wanted to come back in June, TT said no, and that was it.

Strahan came back in late AUGUST and was welcomed back. And won them a SB. Favre un-retiring in late June was not a big deal.

What does it matter that he waffled all summer and stated he had nothing more to give? That he retired and the team went ahead and drafted 2 QBs and prepared for life without him?That his agent apparently put out trade feelers in April?

That Brett took things to the media and basically called his boss a liar?

That Brett did not prepare in the offseason like the year before?

Yeah, I guess to some none of that would matter.

Sure, he could have stepped back in...as I have said over and over, they were probably better off with him for this year. The decision was made for not just this year.

Strahan did not first retire and waffle several times.

 

[sho nuff]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

One of the guys I hunt with said something similar last weekend, and that he is a real Packer fan and this whole thing is a total disgrace to Favre.When I asked him who he would root for if the Packers played the Jets, he replied with "the Jets".

Sounds like a Brett Favre fan, and not a real Packer fan.I guess my mom, who sides with the Packers...is not a real fan. I guess her memories of being at the Ice Bowl with my Grandfather mean nothing...I mean, she went against #4 so she is not a real fan to HK.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

This quote always amuses me when sho nuff tries and convinces himself that TT and McCarthy wanted Favre back.

Favre called McCarthy on June 20 and told him that he wanted to come back.

"When he picked up the phone again after he dropped it, he said, 'Oh, God, Brett. You're putting us in a tight spot,'" Favre said. "He said, 'Brett, playing here is not an option.' Those were his exact, exact words."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3561440

What amuses me is that you keep claiming I am saying TT and McC wanted him back in June and that TT and McC would have been fine with him coming back in March.Also...a quote in June has nothing to do with what was going on in March and April now does it/

Thanks for again providing a quote that does not disprove a thing I, or several others have been saying.

And I say several others because you and phase act as if I am the only saying these things and support the Packers side of this in any way (which is far from the truth).

What do the dates matter?It was BEFORE training camp. He knew the offense. Favre could have slipped right back in June 20th, and it wouldn't have been an issue. TT felt like they had moved on, and that was the end of it.

I'm not sure what the debate is. Favre wanted to come back in June, TT said no, and that was it.

Strahan came back in late AUGUST and was welcomed back. And won them a SB. Favre un-retiring in late June was not a big deal.

What does it matter that he waffled all summer and stated he had nothing more to give? That he retired and the team went ahead and drafted 2 QBs and prepared for life without him? He didn't waffle all summer. He knew he wasn't wanted back in Green Bay.

That his agent apparently put out trade feelers in April?

Again, his agent and Favre knew that TT didn't want him back.

That Brett took things to the media and basically called his boss a liar?

Because it appears that TT/staff did lie/misrepresent on several issues.

That Brett did not prepare in the offseason like the year before?

Ask the Jets how that is working out for them.

Yeah, I guess to some none of that would matter.

Sure, he could have stepped back in...as I have said over and over, they were probably better off with him for this year. The decision was made for not just this year.

Strahan did not first retire and waffle several times.

 

[sho nuff]

I have said since Day 1 that TT is making what is quite possibly the biggest blunder in NFL history.

Packer fans (the real ones, not some of the message board posers in this thread with jealousy based vendettas against Favre) all agree with you. It is criminal what has happened to that franchise.

Again...an of you care to back up this "the real Packer fans" crap?Sorry, I have no jealousy based vendetta against Favre. What am I jealous of?

I defended the guy for years and years...there is no vendetta at all.

And the majority of fans both on message boards and just about every poll ever taken...do not agree that TT is as bad as you all are claiming.

You simply have no facts to back that up.

Sure...some of you will talk about people calling into talk radio....ever wonder why usually negative people call in?

Heck...2 years ago people were calling in down here to get rid of Jeff Fisher...thats the extreme position people take when people who don't know as much about football as they think they do...call up to talk radio shows to complain because the team is not doing exactly what they want it to be doing.

It would seem to me that TT is the whole reason that the bad D, bad line, etc that you talk about is there. So no matter which side you look at it TT is at fault.Getting rid of #4 was a mistake. Good ol' 4 was one over-time game away from a super bowl on a 3 loss season.

Sure he threw the Int in overtime but he was the offense. The rushing game put up a total of about 25-30 yds rushing. The only offense GB had was Favre passing. The giants were putting together good drives and won the TOP battle by about 2 to 1. The giants kn

ew the Packers could not run and just had to find a way to force the mistakes in the passing game.

If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way.

The loss was a TEAM loss not all because of Favre as some like to point out. Sure he was trying to make something happen but the whole team failed around him.

The packers are absolutely a better team with Favre at QB versus Rodgers. He's proven that this year by going into a brand new system and getting his team into good shape for the play-offs. Rodgers has practiced this offense for awhile now and has done a respectable job this year but I do not see him carrying a team the way Favre did right now. Rodgers is a slightly above average QB and if the rest of the team is sub-par or average the the Packers will be average.

Really? TT is the reason that Cullen Jenkins got hurt? Nick Barnett too?TT made Bigby miss Lance Moore the other night?

TT made Pickett get worse? Wow.

Sure, you can blame him for not resigning Corey Williams during the season last year...I have said that many times actually. Though, Corey has not really be lighting it up in Cleveland either while playing next to Rogers.

I put blame on the players as well though. Several are simply not playing up to how they played last year on D. The line and LBs mainly. The secondary, prior to Monday, had been playing at an elite level.

Good ol #4 was not the only reason that team was 13-3 last year either.

And he threw more than one INT that game and was pretty off most of the game...as was Harris on Burress...as was the Oline, and IMO it was one of McCarthy's poorest called games from a coaching standpoint. I have never blamed just Favre for that game and won't start now.

As for blaming Grant's run on the pick? Are you kidding? Had Favre just thrown the ball to the outside rather than the inside, it would have been a first down. It was a good read...but a bad throw. He threw it the one place he could not afford to miss. And it cost him and the team.

And I agree...Rodgers is not carrying the team. Going into this year I did not expect him to or expect him to have to. The defense played so much better last year and what it looked like we would have had for a running game (which they have had the past few games), he should not have to do as much on his own. So far, that has not worked out as the D has not been good, punting has not helped them either...and the running game is just recently getting back on track.

1. Injuries happen I never blamed that on TT. I'm assuming based off your statement the Packers did not deal with injuries last year so it was easier on the team.2. The defense is an average D this year and was only slightly above average last year. I'd have to look but the average per game does not seem to be more than 3-5 points per game.

3. Of course he was not the only reason but a large part of it. The running game was below average last year and has actually improved slightly this year.

4. I stand by my statement "If Grant had busted an 8yd run to start over-time versus a 2yd run there is a lot less chance of Favre throwing the pick. If the running game existed at all versus something like 1 or 2 yds per carry the game could have swung the packers way". Once you take the running game away the mistakes will come on offense it is only a matter of time. Overtime just made this worse especially when the D is giving up big drives.

5. So far this year the running game has been slightly better.

6. The biggest drop-off in the stats I have seen are with the passing game.

I'm looking at this open-minded. I could care less about Favre or Rodgers but if you wanted to make a play-off run and super-bowl run you needed Favre not Rodgers. Long term I still am not sold on Rodgers being anything more than you average to slightly above average QB. He needs a team around him.

1. They did not have near the impactful injuries last year that they have this year.2. The difference is the D just can't seem to get off the field. They are very poor against the run.

3. The running game was below average to start the season...they got progressively better and were much improved once Grant was starting.

4. If Grant had busted alot of other runs things would not be needed. Again, that game was not lost because of just Favre, I have never said it was. But the fact remains Grant did not bust a big run and he made a poor pass.

5. On average from last year...yes, as compared to the last 8 games last year? No, the running game is worse until recently.

6. You are not looking close enough at the D IMO.

IMO, to just make a playoff run was not enough tohttp://www.imdb.com/media/rm2081134080/tt0800080 keep Favre. Anything short of a SB win, which was a long shot even with Faver, would have been a failure IMO.

All QBs need a team around them...even Favre.

1. I would throw this in the slight negative bin over last year but looking at the team as a whole they have coped well. 2. The defense has been playing at an elite level as you stated about the secondary. I think a lot of that is the impression they are on the field a lot. I don't have TOP stats but scoring wise I would think they are close to last year in what they have given up. Especially if you look at the fact they only scored 4 times all of last year. Could be 1-2 point per game difference? Of course I'm gong from memory so I could be wrong.

3. The running game has improved and at an already 10yd per game differnce we can throw it out as an issue from last year to this year.

4. So we can drop how bad the running game was and see it would have been an improvement for favre this year.

5. See 4 we can throw this out from last year to this year.

6. I think the D is equal if not more explosive than last year. Basically the scoring they have done equals out the few extra points (3-5) a game they are given up.

7. Maybe the D is on the field longer since the passing game is getting 50yd per game less and possibly the 1st down % of the offense is lower because of the new starter.

8. How much does the play calling change with a unseasoned QB in hurt the defense also?\

The drop seems to be in the QB position and some key injuries as you have pointed out which would be hard to equate from year to year.

1. I think they have coped ok from losing Barnett and the time Harris missed. I don't think they have done well at all with the loss of Cullen Jenkins.2. The secondary has played at an elite level sure...the rest of the D not so much. And part of them being on the field alot is their own inability to get off the field on 3rd down and to stop anyone from running the ball.

3. You keep basing it soley on last year's total stats. Things were far different once Grant started last year. The start of this year, the run game was bad...far worse than how they ended last year, but better than how they started last year. Overall, I expect them to be better in total this year...this is not a surprise. But they are not at the level yet that they were last year to finish up...but getting there.

4 and 5. Why are we throwing it out? The run game down the stretch last year was better than the run game that started this year...and only recently have they been coming close. Part of it is the line, part of it has been Grant...part of it, IMO, is McCarthy still gets away from the run game way too early.

6. I think you are nuts if you think the Ds are equal. They have rallied with some INTs for TDs...but remember several of those came in 2 games (Detroit and Indy). They are allowing so much more on the ground, and more points per game. I don't see how anyone can think this defense this year is even close to as good as they were last year.

7. Maybe some of it...but does not explain how bad they were Monday night...as GB dominated TOP in the first half and still gave up 24 points.

8. Maybe some...hard to tell. But the defense as a whole has played worse. Pickett was very good last year...not so much this year. The LBs were very good last year...and IMO have been a huge weakness this year.

The drop continues to be with the defense and the drop in QB was expected some...and it has been less IMO, than actually expected.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

This quote always amuses me when sho nuff tries and convinces himself that TT and McCarthy wanted Favre back.

Favre called McCarthy on June 20 and told him that he wanted to come back.

"When he picked up the phone again after he dropped it, he said, 'Oh, God, Brett. You're putting us in a tight spot,'" Favre said. "He said, 'Brett, playing here is not an option.' Those were his exact, exact words."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3561440

What amuses me is that you keep claiming I am saying TT and McC wanted him back in June and that TT and McC would have been fine with him coming back in March.Also...a quote in June has nothing to do with what was going on in March and April now does it/

Thanks for again providing a quote that does not disprove a thing I, or several others have been saying.

And I say several others because you and phase act as if I am the only saying these things and support the Packers side of this in any way (which is far from the truth).

The quote proves you wrong again when you make comments that if Favre wanted to play for the Packers he would be there. Now I await your 300+ words rebuttal.

The quote proves that on June 20th it was not an option.It does nothing to even address my position that TT and McC would have welcomed him back in March and April.

That you think it does is not really surprising.

I clearly stated if he wanted to play for him he would not have retired or waffled. Just like I clearly stated earlier in this thread that "the way Favre was playing" I did not think the team would have been better off.

Simply things you continue to miss in order to keep arguing.

At this point I am not sure if you even know what the hell you have been arguing. You backpeddle, spin, and come up with stuff that is very amusing.