Missing Element-Brett Favre & The Packers (1 Viewer)

[Phase of the Game]

The biggest thing that bothers me as a Packer fan is that I think I may have overestimated how much talent is on this team. This team desperately needs playmakers. Outside of Jennings, Woodson, and Collins they don't really have any.

I think Ted Thompson also overestimated how much talent is on the team.

 

[jurrassic]

The biggest thing that bothers me as a Packer fan is that I think I may have overestimated how much talent is on this team. This team desperately needs playmakers. Outside of Jennings, Woodson, and Collins they don't really have any.

I think Ted Thompson also overestimated how much talent is on the team.

I think Thompson is just too patient in waiting for these guys to develop.

 

[griz145389]

It sure was a shame when Favre retired... who knows how this season would have gone if he had simply said "Sure, I'll play another year" to the Packers?

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

And all Thompson had to do was tell Brett they wanted him to return. But Thompson had NO CONTACT with Favre prior to his retirement and it is well known Thompson didn't want Favre back.

Do you think its that simple.That Thompson calling him would have made that much of a difference at that point?

Yes

 

[parasaurolophus]

It sure was a shame when Favre retired... who knows how this season would have gone if he had simply said "Sure, I'll play another year" to the Packers?

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

And all Thompson had to do was tell Brett they wanted him to return. But Thompson had NO CONTACT with Favre prior to his retirement and it is well known Thompson didn't want Favre back.

Do you think its that simple.That Thompson calling him would have made that much of a difference at that point?

Yes

there is no doubt in my mind a little recruiting would have ended all this garbage.

 

[JamesTheScot]

if you deny Favre's leadership having any effect on this team at all you must also believe...That rivalries mean nothing to a players mindset and performance.That there is no such thing as bulletin board material.That defending a championship is just as easy as winning one.That the mental fatigue of a season has no effects on performance.That a good locker room has no effect on performance.That TO is not a cancer.

I don't think too many people are denying that.I deny its had enough of an effect to change this season from crap to any huge success though.

Exactly, Sho. Anyone who thinks this team with Favre would be headed back to the NFC championship game is on crack. People act like no team has ever regressed after a successful year.Emotional mindset can impact player performance. But it's very over-rated and it's usually short term in effect. And the more often you go to the well, the less effective it becomes each time. How long does the underdog team use that chip on it's shoulder to hang with the more talented competition? Maybe a half? Can they get up just as high for the next week's game against a similarly overpowering opponent or do they have a let down?Winning a championship isn't easy to begin with, so winning another one (as in defending it) isn't going to be easy either. That's a horrible cliche, expecially in football where the subtle, intricate teamwork and details like injuries and staff changes have a large cumulative effect. But even if this cliche were true, what makes one think the Packers would be immune to this type of regression if Favre was there this year?Being Favre-less is the easy scapegoat to this year's disappointment. Why have the Bengals regressed under Carson Palmer? Why did the Cowboys look so good this weekend with Romo yet looked so bad early in the season with Romo? Did the Cowboys' defense suddenly become amenable to Romo's leadership over the past few weeks?

 

[Phase of the Game]

if you deny Favre's leadership having any effect on this team at all you must also believe...That rivalries mean nothing to a players mindset and performance.That there is no such thing as bulletin board material.That defending a championship is just as easy as winning one.That the mental fatigue of a season has no effects on performance.That a good locker room has no effect on performance.That TO is not a cancer.

I don't think too many people are denying that.I deny its had enough of an effect to change this season from crap to any huge success though.

Why did the Cowboys look so good this weekend with Romo yet looked so bad early in the season with Romo?

The Cowboys started the season 4-1 and he got hurt at the end of the next game against Arizona. The team struggled when Romo wasn't in the lineup.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Favre sensed that Thompson didn't want him back and I think that is one of the main reasons that Favre decided to retire Favre unretired. Because he was angry that TT didn't beg him to come back. Brett admitted tried to explain away his own words from his own retirement press conference by trying to convince us he wasn't ready to announce his retirement when he did.

I fixed it for you.

 

[zDragon]

It sure was a shame when Favre retired... who knows how this season would have gone if he had simply said "Sure, I'll play another year" to the Packers?

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

These are two damn Everyone wants to blame the Packers, but they DID welcome him back, even after his games. But FAVRE was the one who had his little feelings hurt and told McCarthy he couldn't give it 100% to play for Green Bay. THAT is when they made the decision to trade him.All the detractors in here conveniently forget about this.The Defense (Or lack there of) is the single biggest reason they are 5-9 this year. Rodgers HAS led them to "come from behind" scores, only to have the Defense let their opponents walk right on down the field to score again, making Rodgers have to lead another drive. The people in here conveniently leave that out too. Yes yesterday there was enough time to drive again, and that was a terrible pass. I don't absolve Rodgers of everything, but those in here that place everything on his shoulders, zdragon, springroll, okie pringle, phase of the game......just to name a few, well you guys make yourselves look foolish. try watching a whole season of games, not just what you read. And if you are watching, open your mind, not to mention your eyes.

You ask us to open our minds yet you don't seem to won't to and call others foolish for seeing what I believe to be the complete picture. Offense Drive StatsCategory Number (2008,2007)Overall (11th,4th)Yds/drive 29.53 (14th,6th)Pts/Drive 2.00 (13th,5th)Tds/Drive .221 (13th,6th)Drive Success Rate .681 (14th,10th)The defense is not as good as last year but they are not the " the single biggest reason ". Everyone points to points allowed but never at any of the actual reason to why that number has gone up by 6pts. There is plenty of blame to go around and to single out the defense only is being blind to the overall situation.

 

[Phase of the Game]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

It's obvious you have no concept of the leadership Favre displayed on the field while he played for the Packers.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

Favre sensed that Thompson didn't want him back and I think that is one of the main reasons that Favre decided to retire Favre unretired. Because he was angry that TT didn't beg him to come back. Brett admitted tried to explain away his own words from his own retirement press conference by trying to convince us he wasn't ready to announce his retirement when he did.

I fixed it for you.

How is that leadership in sports studying going for ya?

 

[BeaverCleaver]

There is so much more to leadership than players giving effort.

Really? Like what? Specifically please.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

The biggest thing that bothers me as a Packer fan is that I think I may have overestimated how much talent is on this team. This team desperately needs playmakers. Outside of Jennings, Woodson, and Collins they don't really have any.

I think Ted Thompson also overestimated how much talent is on the team.

I think Thompson is just too patient in waiting for these guys to develop.

Hmm. I don't know.Overestimated where?The O line's been a isssue all along. I'm not sure why Thompson is so stubborn with this one. He has not adequately addressed this since day 1. Defensively, I think if Cullen Jenkins is around, we're not really have a conversation about why the D line is so bad. Call it excuses if you'd like, but that guy was playing at a very high level before the injury. He made everyone else better.Plenty of talent at WR though, LB has some decent talent. Desmond Bishop has shown some things. The secondary looks to have some talent as well. Frankly, O line is my major concern. Also, did anyone hear the announcer's in Sunday's game talk about an organizational debate about Ryan Grant's future? It was glossed overy quickly, but they made it sound like many in the organization are questioning whether he is the long term answer at rb. Just curious if anyone else heard that.

 

[GreenNGold]

The Packers have been the youngest team in the league for 3 years in a row now. They should be getting better, not worse, as they become more experienced.

 

[sho nuff]

It sure was a shame when Favre retired... who knows how this season would have gone if he had simply said "Sure, I'll play another year" to the Packers?

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

And all Thompson had to do was tell Brett they wanted him to return. But Thompson had NO CONTACT with Favre prior to his retirement and it is well known Thompson didn't want Favre back.

Do you think its that simple.That Thompson calling him would have made that much of a difference at that point?

Yes

You can have that opinion...but IMO, its far from the truth.IMO, at that point, it would have taken alot more than Ted saying Brett, we'd like you back.Because McCarthy did such things and it did nothing.

 

[sho nuff]

It sure was a shame when Favre retired... who knows how this season would have gone if he had simply said "Sure, I'll play another year" to the Packers?

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

These are two damn Everyone wants to blame the Packers, but they DID welcome him back, even after his games. But FAVRE was the one who had his little feelings hurt and told McCarthy he couldn't give it 100% to play for Green Bay. THAT is when they made the decision to trade him.All the detractors in here conveniently forget about this.The Defense (Or lack there of) is the single biggest reason they are 5-9 this year. Rodgers HAS led them to "come from behind" scores, only to have the Defense let their opponents walk right on down the field to score again, making Rodgers have to lead another drive. The people in here conveniently leave that out too. Yes yesterday there was enough time to drive again, and that was a terrible pass. I don't absolve Rodgers of everything, but those in here that place everything on his shoulders, zdragon, springroll, okie pringle, phase of the game......just to name a few, well you guys make yourselves look foolish. try watching a whole season of games, not just what you read. And if you are watching, open your mind, not to mention your eyes.

You ask us to open our minds yet you don't seem to won't to and call others foolish for seeing what I believe to be the complete picture. Offense Drive StatsCategory Number (2008,2007)Overall (11th,4th)Yds/drive 29.53 (14th,6th)Pts/Drive 2.00 (13th,5th)Tds/Drive .221 (13th,6th)Drive Success Rate .681 (14th,10th)The defense is not as good as last year but they are not the " the single biggest reason ". Everyone points to points allowed but never at any of the actual reason to why that number has gone up by 6pts. There is plenty of blame to go around and to single out the defense only is being blind to the overall situation.

Agreed...its not just the defense...but the defense is the biggest part of it IMO.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

It sure was a shame when Favre retired... who knows how this season would have gone if he had simply said "Sure, I'll play another year" to the Packers?

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

And all Thompson had to do was tell Brett they wanted him to return. But Thompson had NO CONTACT with Favre prior to his retirement and it is well known Thompson didn't want Favre back.

Do you think its that simple.That Thompson calling him would have made that much of a difference at that point?

Yes

.Because McCarthy did such things and it did nothing.

Because Favre knew that TT didn't want him back.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Thompson NEVER checked with Favre prior to his retirement. You can blame Favre all you want but to say "the whole mess is the fault of Favre" is laughable. Ted Thompson is at fault in the mess too!

Wow. Let me make sure I understand your position.AFTER Favre tells the Packer organization that he wants to retire, TT is at fault for not "checking" with Favre BEFORE the retirement news conference to make sure Favre wants to retire?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre was too cowardly to speak up if he had changed his mind?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre would say one thing at the conference and cry convincingly about it but yet not really mean it?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that "yes" means "no" with Favre and Favre had no choice but to follow through with the retirement press conference even though Favre didn't really want to?Everytime I order for my five year-old at a restaurant I run through this drill. I ask what he wants to drink. He tells me. Then I ask him if he's sure BEFORE I place the order. But of course he's five and I don't ask him to provide leadership to my pro football team.So TT is at fault for not treating Favre like a five year-old.So how many times was TT supposed to ask Favre the question before he could assume Favre was telling him the truth?

 

[BeaverCleaver]

Thompson NEVER checked with Favre prior to his retirement. You can blame Favre all you want but to say "the whole mess is the fault of Favre" is laughable. Ted Thompson is at fault in the mess too!

Wow. Let me make sure I understand your position.AFTER Favre tells the Packer organization that he wants to retire, TT is at fault for not "checking" with Favre BEFORE the retirement news conference to make sure Favre wants to retire?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre was too cowardly to speak up if he had changed his mind?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre would say one thing at the conference and cry convincingly about it but yet not really mean it?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that "yes" means "no" with Favre and Favre had no choice but to follow through with the retirement press conference even though Favre didn't really want to?Everytime I order for my five year-old at a restaurant I run through this drill. I ask what he wants to drink. He tells me. Then I ask him if he's sure BEFORE I place the order. But of course he's five and I don't ask him to provide leadership to my pro football team.So TT is at fault for not treating Favre like a five year-old.So how many times was TT supposed to ask Favre the question before he could assume Favre was telling him the truth?

It is obvious you have a negative bias against Favre when you equate him to a five year old. WOW!Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that Thompson didn't want Favre back when most every NFL insider has?

 

[parasaurolophus]

Thompson NEVER checked with Favre prior to his retirement. You can blame Favre all you want but to say "the whole mess is the fault of Favre" is laughable. Ted Thompson is at fault in the mess too!

Wow. Let me make sure I understand your position.AFTER Favre tells the Packer organization that he wants to retire, TT is at fault for not "checking" with Favre BEFORE the retirement news conference to make sure Favre wants to retire?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre was too cowardly to speak up if he had changed his mind?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre would say one thing at the conference and cry convincingly about it but yet not really mean it?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that "yes" means "no" with Favre and Favre had no choice but to follow through with the retirement press conference even though Favre didn't really want to?Everytime I order for my five year-old at a restaurant I run through this drill. I ask what he wants to drink. He tells me. Then I ask him if he's sure BEFORE I place the order. But of course he's five and I don't ask him to provide leadership to my pro football team.So TT is at fault for not treating Favre like a five year-old.So how many times was TT supposed to ask Favre the question before he could assume Favre was telling him the truth?

TT is at fault for not researching and staying on top of what was best for the franchise. What is so hard to get?Favre was on freakin national TV hinting about playing for christ sake. His job is to pursue, recruit, sign, evaluate, negotiate, etc etc. Its called being a GM. Quite frankly this is probably why he rarely gets free agents. He doesnt know what he is doing. "Wait? I am supposed to call them?" He should have been on the phone with Favre every day. He should have sent Favre gift baskets if thats what it took. He was the face of the franchise that has had remarkable success. It was a smart business decision as well as the smart personnel decision. ITS HIS FREAKIN JOB.

 

[JamesTheScot]

That's not what Favre said in June. His story changes with the tide. In spring Favre said he got a call when he was changing his mind(at the owners meeting). TT and McCarthy were going to fly to see him but he called back and changed his mind.Even if what Favre now says is true why didn't he say he didn't want the locker. He wants to play?Too many stories too little time to debunk them all.

Sure Thompson wanted Favre back......here is your locker Brett!! Show us where Favre stated he had contact with Thompson prior to his retirement.

Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him."The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."

So let's look at the substance of what Favre admitted to in YOUR quotes...That TT and McCarthy were going to come by and see him but Favre said not to because he couldn't commit to coming back.So, again, how is that different from what bcr8f posted?What Favre "disputes" is that "they made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me". That's the dispute!?!?! Whether or not they were only coming to see Brett or were coming to see him and attend the owners' meeting. That was important for Brett to clear up? Well, thanks for clearing up that detail, Brett!The fact that it bothered Brett that TT's tickets weren't in fact round trip from Wisconsin to Missisippi wouldn't at all support the accusation that Favre is a spoiled prima donna who was really only concerned with having the Packers beg him to come back.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

Thompson NEVER checked with Favre prior to his retirement. You can blame Favre all you want but to say "the whole mess is the fault of Favre" is laughable. Ted Thompson is at fault in the mess too!

Wow. Let me make sure I understand your position.AFTER Favre tells the Packer organization that he wants to retire, TT is at fault for not "checking" with Favre BEFORE the retirement news conference to make sure Favre wants to retire?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre was too cowardly to speak up if he had changed his mind?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre would say one thing at the conference and cry convincingly about it but yet not really mean it?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that "yes" means "no" with Favre and Favre had no choice but to follow through with the retirement press conference even though Favre didn't really want to?Everytime I order for my five year-old at a restaurant I run through this drill. I ask what he wants to drink. He tells me. Then I ask him if he's sure BEFORE I place the order. But of course he's five and I don't ask him to provide leadership to my pro football team.So TT is at fault for not treating Favre like a five year-old.So how many times was TT supposed to ask Favre the question before he could assume Favre was telling him the truth?

So you don't have any issues that Thompson didn't speak to Favre once before he announced his retirement? Based on above it is obvious you don't.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

That's not what Favre said in June. His story changes with the tide. In spring Favre said he got a call when he was changing his mind(at the owners meeting). TT and McCarthy were going to fly to see him but he called back and changed his mind.Even if what Favre now says is true why didn't he say he didn't want the locker. He wants to play?Too many stories too little time to debunk them all.

Sure Thompson wanted Favre back......here is your locker Brett!! Show us where Favre stated he had contact with Thompson prior to his retirement.

Favre shot down reports that Thompson and McCarthy had chartered a flight to Mississippi to talk to the quarterback in late March about finalizing his comeback, only to have Favre back out at the last minute. Favre said McCarthy told him they were heading to Orlando, Fla., for the owners' meetings and wanted to stop by to speak with him."The next day I told him, 'Mike, don't worry about coming down or dropping by. I still can't commit,'" he said. "They made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me and I had made a call and said, 'I'm coming back,' which is not true."

So let's look at the substance of what Favre admitted to in YOUR quotes...That TT and McCarthy were going to come by and see him but Favre said not to because he couldn't commit to coming back.So, again, how is that different from what bcr8f posted?What Favre "disputes" is that "they made it sound like they had chartered a plane just to see me". That's the dispute!?!?! Whether or not they were only coming to see Brett or were coming to see him and attend the owners' meeting. That was important for Brett to clear up? Well, thanks for clearing up that detail, Brett!The fact that it bothered Brett that TT's tickets weren't in fact round trip from Wisconsin to Missisippi wouldn't at all support the accusation that Favre is a spoiled prima donna who was really only concerned with having the Packers beg him to come back.

It did needed to be cleared up because many of the Favre haters/TT lovers want to think that they were making a special trip just to see Brett when the reality was they were heading to the owners meetings. Of course Favre couldn't commit. He knew that he wasn't wanted back in Green Bay. I guess that trip by Thompson to give Favre his locker to him was the perfect way to say..."Hi Brett we really want you back but here is your locker".

 

[JamesTheScot]

There is so much more to leadership than players giving effort.

Really? Like what? Specifically please.

Are you serious? I suggest you google leadership in sports and educate yourself.http://www.money-zine.com/Career-Developme...ship-in-Sports/

I rather have you educate me on how exactly Favre's leadership would be making the difference with this year's Packers.No, wait, that's an intangible.

To answer my question specifically, you'd have to be able to point to examples of where Favre's leadership made a difference in the past and then compare that to where Rodger's leadership currently does not provide that same difference.

Instead, you link to an article that contains this nugget of wisdom... for COACHES...

"As a coach or a manager, you're trying to motivate your "players" to reach their full potential." That kinda sounds to me like convincing players to give their best effort.

Then there are the "rules of leadership" as stated in the article...

Fortunately there are some simple rules that apply to all leadership situations, including sports:

-Treat players with respect and you will earn their respect.

-Try to understand each player on the team well enough to be able to identify their specific strengths and weaknesses.

-Lead by example - if you expect players to be on time, then you should never be late for a meeting yourself.

-Share your strategy with your players. It is much easier for players to support a strategy if they understand it.

-Remain decisive and confident. A coach's confidence can be contagious. If the players know that you believe in them, then they might start believing in themselves too.

-Finally, instruct players in a positive manner - tell them what you want them to do, not what you don't want them to do.

So ignoring the fact that your article applies to coaches and managers rather than QB's...

How did Favre treat players with respect in a way that Rodgers does not?

Was Favre better at understanding his teammates' strengths and weaknesses than Rodgers?

Does Favre do a better job of leading by example than Rodgers? Maybe he was leading tackling drills in 2007.

Did Favre do a better job of sharing his strategies with the team?

Well, we'll just skip over the decisive and confident rule...as FAvre did this offseason.

Maybe Favre instructed his teammates in a postive manner while Rodgers just cusses them like animals.

Any more insight into what leadership brings to the team?

 

[JamesTheScot]

There is so much more to leadership than players giving effort.

Really? Like what? Specifically please.

Solve problems. The first step towards becoming a leader is to look around and find ways to make the world a better place. Observe your surroundings and listen to people. How can you help? Discover what your talents are, develop them, and focus on applying them towards making a difference. Think of problems in the broader sense - they're not always easy to define. Look for needs, niches, conflicts, gaps that need to be filled, and inefficiencies. The solutions won't always be creative or cutting edge; sometimes they're the simplest things.Motivate people. Why are the employees there? What keeps them with your organization and stops them from going somewhere else? What makes the good days good? What makes them stick with the organization after a bad day or a bad week? Don't assume it's money--most people aren't that one-dimensional. Ask the employees how they're liking their job on a regular basis. Encourage them to be honest with you. Be a good listener. Then take action based upon what they tell you. If health is important to them, give them time to go to the gym and work out. If their family is important, respect the time they may need to send their kids off to school in the morning or pick them up in the afternoon. Remember, our values are what makes us "tick". If you manage by respecting your team's values, they will give you 110% of their effort. Delegate. You're a manager because you're good at what you do, but that doesn't mean you're supposed to do it ALL. Your job as a manager is to teach other people how to do a good job. If you're uncomfortable with delegating, however, this can be a huge leap of faith for you. One way to overcome this is to start small. Give people tasks that, if performed incorrectly, can be fixed. Take the opportunity to teach and empower your employees. Then gradually give them tasks with greater responsibility as you come to understand their strengths and weaknesses and learn how to anticipate any problems they might have so you can coach them properly before they begin. Keep the door open. Always remind people that if they have any questions or concerns, you're ready and willing to listen. Don't be one of those managers who inadvertently makes an employee feel like they're "bothering" you when they bring up a question or concern. Instead of seeing it as another crisis to manage, look at it as an opportunity to show your employee how much you want this organization to be a fulfilling place to work. Never minimize or dismiss their concerns, and always make sure that you've answered their questions completely. Let people make mistakes. As a manager, you take responsibility for other people's actions, so the last thing you want to do is be responsible for someone else's mistakes. In an attempt to be proactive and prevent mistakes, you might give careful instructions and create clear, strict standards. But are you making people afraid of mistakes? Do they always check with you about every little thing, reluctant to make their own decisions because they might not do it correctly? That ends up making the employees more dependent on you, which makes them less effective and unnecessarily drains a significant portion of your time. In order for people to think for themselves, they need to learn, and in order to learn, sometimes we need to make mistakes. Trust them, and give them a fair margin of error. Learn from your own mistakes. When things don't turn out the way you expected, recognize what you could've done differently and verbalize this realization to your employees. This shows them that you make mistakes, too, and it also shows them how they should handle their own mistakes. Whenever you're doing something correctly after having done it incorrectly in the past, let whoever is watching know. E.g. "The reason I know to press this button is because this happened to me when I first started out, and I made the mistake of pressing the blue button, thinking 'This will shut down the system, which should resolve the issue' and I found out--the hard way--that it makes the issue even worse!" Treat everyone equally. Most of us aren't as egalitarian as we'd like to be. Many times, favoritism happens on a subconscious level. The tendency is to give more positive recognition to the people who remind us of ourselves somehow and who actually like us, rather than to the people who make the biggest contributions to the organization.[1] In the long run, it's people in the latter group who will make the most progress in achieving the organization's goals, so monitor your own behavior carefully and make sure you're not accidentally short-changing them, even if they give you the impression that your positive regard doesn't affect them. Some people are shy away from positive feedback but appreciate it nonetheless. Step up and confess as soon as you realize what went wrong. Waiting to see how things shake out is a bad idea. As soon as a situation starts going south, step up and point out where the problem started - with you, yourself. The sooner the problem is identified, the sooner a resolution is possible, and that minimizes consequences. Don't prevaricate or obfuscate. This means you should state the problem directly, clearly and simply rather than beating around the bush or attempting to confuse the issue in order to make you look less responsible. Again, when problems crop up, the quickest way to the solution is simple, direct identification of the problem's origin and details. Trying to skate around an issue is just frustrating, and in the end the problem takes longer to deal with and becomes more complicated the longer it goes on. Don't try to shift even a part of the blame. This doesn't mean that you should accept blame that you don't deserve. But saying things like, "Well, if he hadn't done this then I wouldn't have done that." is lame. Instead, say, "I am so sorry for this. I had no idea that what I did could cause this type of problem. How can I help fix it?" Realize that the truth will be discovered eventually. It's been said, and is generally true, that "the truth is just a shortcut to what's going to happen anyway." If you're around when the truth does come out, and you haven't confessed your part in the problem, your credibility for all future situations will be compromised terribly. When others realize that you had the last clear chance to step up and own that mistake, but instead you allowed them to share blame with you, they will not appreciate it at all. When your boss realizes that you allowed others to bear responsibility for your mistake, your days will be numbered, or at the very least, your prospects for advancement will be curtailed significantly. Trust the other party to help. Hopefully, you have a decent parent, significant other or manager; or if you're in school, your teacher is fair. Assuming your boss is a good boss (or whatever authority figure is in play) is the smartest assumption to make in this case. The reality is that the person who has authority over you can protect you better than anyone else, but if you don't admit you caused a problem, there will be no shield when the truth eventually comes out. If it's a working situation, and you go to your boss as soon as you realize what's happened, s/he can help you more than you may know. Trusting your boss to help you out of a jam can actually pay big dividends later - by confessing to this problem, you've just shown your boss that if a problem is really your responsibility, you'll step up and say so. When problems crop up later and evidence points to you, if you say, "No, that wasn't me," your boss will believe you - s/he knows that you are mature enough to admit your mistakes, because you've done so in the past. "Thanks for coming forward."Help solve the problem. Once you've caused a problem, don't wait to be forced or pressured to remedy it - volunteer. Don't ask if you can help - ask how you can help. Watch carefully as those who help the most do their work, and take note of the way they resolve the issue. File this information in your memory and have it handy for later use. Think of the big picture. As you're solving problems, you might notice patterns, and wonder if many of those problems are symptoms of a deeper, bigger problem. Thoreau once said, "For every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil, one is hacking at the root." Take a step back and try to find the root. The thing about the deeper problem is that it's not something anybody can solve alone; it'll require a group effort, which is where your role as a leader comes into play. Be proactive. If you've got these ideas in your mind about what the deeper issues are, you can probably predict the problems that'll crop up as a result. Instead of waiting for those problems to appear, take steps to prevent them. If you can't prevent them, then you can at least prepare. That's the core difference between a leader and a manager. A good manager responds well to a variety of situations; a good leader takes effective action to prevent and create situations before they actually happen.Explain yourself. Once the recovery is underway, you should try to explain what your thought process was, so that your boss, significant other or parent can understand what led you to the point where things went pear-shaped. Many times, once you've explained your thinking, others will say, "Well, that does make sense in a way, however..." By doing this, you are allowing them to help correct the way you think about things, and helping yourself for the future.Be careful not to justify the mistake or behavior. Look at the difference in these two statements: "I'm sorry I yelled at you, but I haven't been sleeping well." (justification) versus "I've been on edge because I haven't been getting much sleep lately, but it was wrong of me to yell at you and I'm sorry." Learn how to apologize properly. Accept consequences. There may be some - that's why it's scary to step forward and admit responsibility. But shouldering blame early and helping in the resolution of the problem will make any punishment or penance less harsh. Take your punishment as courageously as possible, and when it's done, it's really over - you'll have learned your lesson and maintained personal integrity in the process. Recover gracefully. It isn't mistakes that should define us - it's recovery. Most clients, when asked, will say that their most trusted contractors and vendors have not been perfect, but that when mistakes were made, the contractor made it up to them by admitting their responsibility and offering either a steep discount or replacement free of charge, or offered discounts on future jobs in exchange for the inconvenience caused by their error. It's not the mistake - it's the way you rebound from it that matters to most people. Hold your head up and move on. Nobody's perfect. We all make mistakes. If we're smart, we learn from those mistakes and take note so that we don't repeat them. Learning experiences that are the most painful are also often the most valuable. Remember that your mistake was just that - it wasn't intentional, you didn't set out to deliberately cause harm or screw someone else up. And as soon as you realized that it was you who caused the problem, you stepped in, ready to help dig everyone out of the hole you put them in. You can hold your head up and feel good knowing that you did your best to help everyone recover with a minimum of pain. Make decisions, and take responsibility for the consequences. In order to exert influence and tackle bigger problems, you're going to need decision-making power, and those decisions will affect the people who grant you that power. This is as much a responsibility as it is an honor. Not only do you need to be able to make sound decisions, but you also need to be willing to be held accountable to them. If things go wrong, people will assume it's your fault (whether it is or not). Think of yourself as the captain of a ship; the fate of the ship is essentially in your hands, and it's up to you to steer everyone in the right direction. So exercise wisdom when calling the shots; hope for the best and prepare for the worst. If you're not prepared to take responsibility for your decisions - if you struggle with hesitation and self-doubt - it might be a good idea to step down. An insecure leader often becomes a tyrant.Share your vision. As a leader, you can see the bigger issues at hand, but you can also see how things could be so much better if we could just remove those obstacles. To get people to help you in changing things, you need to share that positive vision with them. Inspire them. Motivate them. Guide them. Show them how their actions are bringing everyone closer to that dream. "Most important, leaders can conceive and articulate goals that lift people out of their petty preoccupations and unite them in pursuit of objectives worthy of their best efforts."Remember that it's not all about you. The greatest leaders saw their role as a means to an end, and themselves as an instrument of a deeper purpose; any glory, prestige, or wealth was a side effect rather than a motivation. If you want to realize a vision, the most effective way to do it is not with an army of drones; that army will only last as long as you do. For the most long-lasting results, share your vision and let people adopt it as their own, and let it spread like wildfire. Think of yourself as the beginning of a chain reaction--once it's begun, you can step away and it'll continue to happen without any effort on your part. "A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves."TipsCharisma is certainly helpful, but it's not essential. There have been many admired leaders in the human history who weren't the friendliest, most charming person in the bunch. What was important, however, was that people trusted them, and they were inspired by his or her vision. What you will need is good communication skills (whether it's through speaking, writing, even art) so that you can articulate your vision. Always practice what you preach. There's no better way to lose your credibility as a leader than to be hypocrite. "If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader."[3] Understand why you are hesitant. Hesitance stems from uncertainty. Uncertainty is ... well, it's almost guaranteed, for every situation you will ever face. If you're always certain, you're probably wrong, because none of us knows everything. So hesitance is actually a sort of safety or defense mechanism - in the face of uncertainty, almost everyone hesitates a little. Address your fears. A huge factor in hesitation is fear of doing the wrong thing, or making a mistake. There are two main ways to deal with this.One is to imagine that worst case scenario that's really holding you back (like embarrassing one's self--that's a big one for most of us) and saying to yourself, "So what?" People embarrass themselves all the time; in fact, if you watch popular and charming people, you'll see that they mess up too, but more importantly, they respond gracefully to their own mistakes. They joke around about it, they even make fun of themselves, and they immediately accept that they're human, and mistakes happen. And they move on. You can, too. If you make a mistake, it's NOT the end of the world. Secondly, think of the consequences of inaction. Remember that hesitating means NOT acting, and NOT acting has its own consequences. Don't want to talk to that guy because you're worried you'll put your foot in your mouth and ruin your chances with him? Well, you might, and that's okay - life will go on. Or, you might win him over; you never know! BUT, if you don't act, you guarantee that nothing will ever happen. How can sparks fly when you won't even come face-to-face with him? Do you really want to just wait for him to do everything? Would you be happy with how you handled the situation, in retrospect? Train yourself to think, then act. Overcoming hesitance does not mean you should just start jumping blindly into situations - that could get you into trouble, or worse, be dangerous. But taking a moment to mentally consider the ramifications of Decision A or Decision B - and in rare cases, Decision C - could spare you problems later. Train yourself to think through first one possibility and then one other - and stop there unless a third possibility is glaringly obvious. Don't allow yourself to go off on tangent after tangent, chasing down every possible eventuality. Give yourself a choice between two actions (or that rare third one), and then decide. Give yourself a time limit. To help you avoid "Analysis Paralysis," you should give yourself a defined time limit when considering serious actions such as purchasing a home, accepting a job, or quitting one. Instead of grinding over endless possibilities, and then discovering you've now been chewing this over for a week and it's too late to care any more, give yourself a couple of hours to consider accepting a job. Sleep on it before you act on a decision to quit or make an offer on a house. But once you have reached your time limit, take action. Make the decision. If you find that you are hesitant over simple, every day decisions, like asking that pretty girl out, or whether to go to a company party, or even what to have for lunch, try giving yourself just 30 seconds to decide. In this exercise, you must say "yes" at least 50% of the time (in other words, no fair retreating to the safe "non-action" all the time). This will help you to save your "no" for events or decisions where it matters a lot more - or a lot less - what your answer would be. Next time you're deciding what to do and find yourself cursing your hesitance, look at a clock or watch, and start counting down from 30. By the time you reach 1, you must make a positive decision. Example:Co-worker: "We're having drinks at Jojo's tonight - want to join us?" You: "Uhhhmmmm... I'm not sure... ummm who all is going..." Co-worker: "Everyone from Accounting and that pretty new girl... I know you want to meet her..." You: (really nervous and hesitant now) "Wow. I'm not sure..." Co-worker: (resigned to you just not showing up) "Well, okay. Let us know. You're more than welcome to come, though..." (starts moving away) The New You: "You know what - Yes, I'd love to come. I was just thinking about whether I already had something, but it's not important. Thank you for asking me - I'll see you tonight." Co-worker: (Pleasantly surprised) "Great! We'll see you then! ... uh - Her name is Colleen, just so you know." The New You: "OK. See you then. Mmm. Colleen..." (smiling quietly to yourself) Force yourself to do new things. Having new, different experiences helps you learn to cope with new situations, and it builds your self-confidence, which helps you become a more decisive person. Often, hesitance and indecisive behaviours are caused by having lived a sheltered existence, or not having much experience to draw on. Allowing yourself to go to parties or gatherings, or even just going to meetings, conventions, or the movies with different people, broadens your horizons a little bit every time you do it. You hear the stories others tell, and you soon have some stories of your own to tell. As you become more experienced, you will be more certain of what will happen in different circumstances. Being more certain = being less hesitant.In most areas of life, the "best" at something doesn't make them the "best" leader. Rodgers might be putting up better stats, that doesn't mean he's a better leader then Favre. TO is one of the best WRs in the league, does that make him a great leader? He might be the most phyiscally gifted person on the Cowboys, but he's an awful leader. But he plays great, produces, works hard. But again, horrible leader.

The claim isn't that Rodgers is a better leader than Favre, it's the opposite. So that's why I ask, of that huge essay you posted, can you point to anything that Favre does than Rodgers does not? Anything in there that would explain why these packers would be playing better if Favre was providing leadership rather than Rodgers?And that part about making decisions and living with the consequences and not making excuses or justifications is golden. I bet when Rodgers retires, he'll be more decisive than Favre was. At least Favre is leading in the excuses and justifications column.

 

[Stinger Ray]

There is so much more to leadership than players giving effort.

Really? Like what? Specifically please.

Solve problems. The first step towards becoming a leader is to look around and find ways to make the world a better place. Observe your surroundings and listen to people. How can you help? Discover what your talents are, develop them, and focus on applying them towards making a difference. Think of problems in the broader sense - they're not always easy to define. Look for needs, niches, conflicts, gaps that need to be filled, and inefficiencies. The solutions won't always be creative or cutting edge; sometimes they're the simplest things.Motivate people. Why are the employees there? What keeps them with your organization and stops them from going somewhere else? What makes the good days good? What makes them stick with the organization after a bad day or a bad week? Don't assume it's money--most people aren't that one-dimensional. Ask the employees how they're liking their job on a regular basis. Encourage them to be honest with you. Be a good listener. Then take action based upon what they tell you. If health is important to them, give them time to go to the gym and work out. If their family is important, respect the time they may need to send their kids off to school in the morning or pick them up in the afternoon. Remember, our values are what makes us "tick". If you manage by respecting your team's values, they will give you 110% of their effort. Delegate. You're a manager because you're good at what you do, but that doesn't mean you're supposed to do it ALL. Your job as a manager is to teach other people how to do a good job. If you're uncomfortable with delegating, however, this can be a huge leap of faith for you. One way to overcome this is to start small. Give people tasks that, if performed incorrectly, can be fixed. Take the opportunity to teach and empower your employees. Then gradually give them tasks with greater responsibility as you come to understand their strengths and weaknesses and learn how to anticipate any problems they might have so you can coach them properly before they begin. Keep the door open. Always remind people that if they have any questions or concerns, you're ready and willing to listen. Don't be one of those managers who inadvertently makes an employee feel like they're "bothering" you when they bring up a question or concern. Instead of seeing it as another crisis to manage, look at it as an opportunity to show your employee how much you want this organization to be a fulfilling place to work. Never minimize or dismiss their concerns, and always make sure that you've answered their questions completely. Let people make mistakes. As a manager, you take responsibility for other people's actions, so the last thing you want to do is be responsible for someone else's mistakes. In an attempt to be proactive and prevent mistakes, you might give careful instructions and create clear, strict standards. But are you making people afraid of mistakes? Do they always check with you about every little thing, reluctant to make their own decisions because they might not do it correctly? That ends up making the employees more dependent on you, which makes them less effective and unnecessarily drains a significant portion of your time. In order for people to think for themselves, they need to learn, and in order to learn, sometimes we need to make mistakes. Trust them, and give them a fair margin of error. Learn from your own mistakes. When things don't turn out the way you expected, recognize what you could've done differently and verbalize this realization to your employees. This shows them that you make mistakes, too, and it also shows them how they should handle their own mistakes. Whenever you're doing something correctly after having done it incorrectly in the past, let whoever is watching know. E.g. "The reason I know to press this button is because this happened to me when I first started out, and I made the mistake of pressing the blue button, thinking 'This will shut down the system, which should resolve the issue' and I found out--the hard way--that it makes the issue even worse!" Treat everyone equally. Most of us aren't as egalitarian as we'd like to be. Many times, favoritism happens on a subconscious level. The tendency is to give more positive recognition to the people who remind us of ourselves somehow and who actually like us, rather than to the people who make the biggest contributions to the organization.[1] In the long run, it's people in the latter group who will make the most progress in achieving the organization's goals, so monitor your own behavior carefully and make sure you're not accidentally short-changing them, even if they give you the impression that your positive regard doesn't affect them. Some people are shy away from positive feedback but appreciate it nonetheless. Step up and confess as soon as you realize what went wrong. Waiting to see how things shake out is a bad idea. As soon as a situation starts going south, step up and point out where the problem started - with you, yourself. The sooner the problem is identified, the sooner a resolution is possible, and that minimizes consequences. Don't prevaricate or obfuscate. This means you should state the problem directly, clearly and simply rather than beating around the bush or attempting to confuse the issue in order to make you look less responsible. Again, when problems crop up, the quickest way to the solution is simple, direct identification of the problem's origin and details. Trying to skate around an issue is just frustrating, and in the end the problem takes longer to deal with and becomes more complicated the longer it goes on. Don't try to shift even a part of the blame. This doesn't mean that you should accept blame that you don't deserve. But saying things like, "Well, if he hadn't done this then I wouldn't have done that." is lame. Instead, say, "I am so sorry for this. I had no idea that what I did could cause this type of problem. How can I help fix it?" Realize that the truth will be discovered eventually. It's been said, and is generally true, that "the truth is just a shortcut to what's going to happen anyway." If you're around when the truth does come out, and you haven't confessed your part in the problem, your credibility for all future situations will be compromised terribly. When others realize that you had the last clear chance to step up and own that mistake, but instead you allowed them to share blame with you, they will not appreciate it at all. When your boss realizes that you allowed others to bear responsibility for your mistake, your days will be numbered, or at the very least, your prospects for advancement will be curtailed significantly. Trust the other party to help. Hopefully, you have a decent parent, significant other or manager; or if you're in school, your teacher is fair. Assuming your boss is a good boss (or whatever authority figure is in play) is the smartest assumption to make in this case. The reality is that the person who has authority over you can protect you better than anyone else, but if you don't admit you caused a problem, there will be no shield when the truth eventually comes out. If it's a working situation, and you go to your boss as soon as you realize what's happened, s/he can help you more than you may know. Trusting your boss to help you out of a jam can actually pay big dividends later - by confessing to this problem, you've just shown your boss that if a problem is really your responsibility, you'll step up and say so. When problems crop up later and evidence points to you, if you say, "No, that wasn't me," your boss will believe you - s/he knows that you are mature enough to admit your mistakes, because you've done so in the past. "Thanks for coming forward."Help solve the problem. Once you've caused a problem, don't wait to be forced or pressured to remedy it - volunteer. Don't ask if you can help - ask how you can help. Watch carefully as those who help the most do their work, and take note of the way they resolve the issue. File this information in your memory and have it handy for later use. Think of the big picture. As you're solving problems, you might notice patterns, and wonder if many of those problems are symptoms of a deeper, bigger problem. Thoreau once said, "For every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil, one is hacking at the root." Take a step back and try to find the root. The thing about the deeper problem is that it's not something anybody can solve alone; it'll require a group effort, which is where your role as a leader comes into play. Be proactive. If you've got these ideas in your mind about what the deeper issues are, you can probably predict the problems that'll crop up as a result. Instead of waiting for those problems to appear, take steps to prevent them. If you can't prevent them, then you can at least prepare. That's the core difference between a leader and a manager. A good manager responds well to a variety of situations; a good leader takes effective action to prevent and create situations before they actually happen.Explain yourself. Once the recovery is underway, you should try to explain what your thought process was, so that your boss, significant other or parent can understand what led you to the point where things went pear-shaped. Many times, once you've explained your thinking, others will say, "Well, that does make sense in a way, however..." By doing this, you are allowing them to help correct the way you think about things, and helping yourself for the future.Be careful not to justify the mistake or behavior. Look at the difference in these two statements: "I'm sorry I yelled at you, but I haven't been sleeping well." (justification) versus "I've been on edge because I haven't been getting much sleep lately, but it was wrong of me to yell at you and I'm sorry." Learn how to apologize properly. Accept consequences. There may be some - that's why it's scary to step forward and admit responsibility. But shouldering blame early and helping in the resolution of the problem will make any punishment or penance less harsh. Take your punishment as courageously as possible, and when it's done, it's really over - you'll have learned your lesson and maintained personal integrity in the process. Recover gracefully. It isn't mistakes that should define us - it's recovery. Most clients, when asked, will say that their most trusted contractors and vendors have not been perfect, but that when mistakes were made, the contractor made it up to them by admitting their responsibility and offering either a steep discount or replacement free of charge, or offered discounts on future jobs in exchange for the inconvenience caused by their error. It's not the mistake - it's the way you rebound from it that matters to most people. Hold your head up and move on. Nobody's perfect. We all make mistakes. If we're smart, we learn from those mistakes and take note so that we don't repeat them. Learning experiences that are the most painful are also often the most valuable. Remember that your mistake was just that - it wasn't intentional, you didn't set out to deliberately cause harm or screw someone else up. And as soon as you realized that it was you who caused the problem, you stepped in, ready to help dig everyone out of the hole you put them in. You can hold your head up and feel good knowing that you did your best to help everyone recover with a minimum of pain. Make decisions, and take responsibility for the consequences. In order to exert influence and tackle bigger problems, you're going to need decision-making power, and those decisions will affect the people who grant you that power. This is as much a responsibility as it is an honor. Not only do you need to be able to make sound decisions, but you also need to be willing to be held accountable to them. If things go wrong, people will assume it's your fault (whether it is or not). Think of yourself as the captain of a ship; the fate of the ship is essentially in your hands, and it's up to you to steer everyone in the right direction. So exercise wisdom when calling the shots; hope for the best and prepare for the worst. If you're not prepared to take responsibility for your decisions - if you struggle with hesitation and self-doubt - it might be a good idea to step down. An insecure leader often becomes a tyrant.Share your vision. As a leader, you can see the bigger issues at hand, but you can also see how things could be so much better if we could just remove those obstacles. To get people to help you in changing things, you need to share that positive vision with them. Inspire them. Motivate them. Guide them. Show them how their actions are bringing everyone closer to that dream. "Most important, leaders can conceive and articulate goals that lift people out of their petty preoccupations and unite them in pursuit of objectives worthy of their best efforts."Remember that it's not all about you. The greatest leaders saw their role as a means to an end, and themselves as an instrument of a deeper purpose; any glory, prestige, or wealth was a side effect rather than a motivation. If you want to realize a vision, the most effective way to do it is not with an army of drones; that army will only last as long as you do. For the most long-lasting results, share your vision and let people adopt it as their own, and let it spread like wildfire. Think of yourself as the beginning of a chain reaction--once it's begun, you can step away and it'll continue to happen without any effort on your part. "A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves."TipsCharisma is certainly helpful, but it's not essential. There have been many admired leaders in the human history who weren't the friendliest, most charming person in the bunch. What was important, however, was that people trusted them, and they were inspired by his or her vision. What you will need is good communication skills (whether it's through speaking, writing, even art) so that you can articulate your vision. Always practice what you preach. There's no better way to lose your credibility as a leader than to be hypocrite. "If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader."[3] Understand why you are hesitant. Hesitance stems from uncertainty. Uncertainty is ... well, it's almost guaranteed, for every situation you will ever face. If you're always certain, you're probably wrong, because none of us knows everything. So hesitance is actually a sort of safety or defense mechanism - in the face of uncertainty, almost everyone hesitates a little. Address your fears. A huge factor in hesitation is fear of doing the wrong thing, or making a mistake. There are two main ways to deal with this.One is to imagine that worst case scenario that's really holding you back (like embarrassing one's self--that's a big one for most of us) and saying to yourself, "So what?" People embarrass themselves all the time; in fact, if you watch popular and charming people, you'll see that they mess up too, but more importantly, they respond gracefully to their own mistakes. They joke around about it, they even make fun of themselves, and they immediately accept that they're human, and mistakes happen. And they move on. You can, too. If you make a mistake, it's NOT the end of the world. Secondly, think of the consequences of inaction. Remember that hesitating means NOT acting, and NOT acting has its own consequences. Don't want to talk to that guy because you're worried you'll put your foot in your mouth and ruin your chances with him? Well, you might, and that's okay - life will go on. Or, you might win him over; you never know! BUT, if you don't act, you guarantee that nothing will ever happen. How can sparks fly when you won't even come face-to-face with him? Do you really want to just wait for him to do everything? Would you be happy with how you handled the situation, in retrospect? Train yourself to think, then act. Overcoming hesitance does not mean you should just start jumping blindly into situations - that could get you into trouble, or worse, be dangerous. But taking a moment to mentally consider the ramifications of Decision A or Decision B - and in rare cases, Decision C - could spare you problems later. Train yourself to think through first one possibility and then one other - and stop there unless a third possibility is glaringly obvious. Don't allow yourself to go off on tangent after tangent, chasing down every possible eventuality. Give yourself a choice between two actions (or that rare third one), and then decide. Give yourself a time limit. To help you avoid "Analysis Paralysis," you should give yourself a defined time limit when considering serious actions such as purchasing a home, accepting a job, or quitting one. Instead of grinding over endless possibilities, and then discovering you've now been chewing this over for a week and it's too late to care any more, give yourself a couple of hours to consider accepting a job. Sleep on it before you act on a decision to quit or make an offer on a house. But once you have reached your time limit, take action. Make the decision. If you find that you are hesitant over simple, every day decisions, like asking that pretty girl out, or whether to go to a company party, or even what to have for lunch, try giving yourself just 30 seconds to decide. In this exercise, you must say "yes" at least 50% of the time (in other words, no fair retreating to the safe "non-action" all the time). This will help you to save your "no" for events or decisions where it matters a lot more - or a lot less - what your answer would be. Next time you're deciding what to do and find yourself cursing your hesitance, look at a clock or watch, and start counting down from 30. By the time you reach 1, you must make a positive decision. Example:Co-worker: "We're having drinks at Jojo's tonight - want to join us?" You: "Uhhhmmmm... I'm not sure... ummm who all is going..." Co-worker: "Everyone from Accounting and that pretty new girl... I know you want to meet her..." You: (really nervous and hesitant now) "Wow. I'm not sure..." Co-worker: (resigned to you just not showing up) "Well, okay. Let us know. You're more than welcome to come, though..." (starts moving away) The New You: "You know what - Yes, I'd love to come. I was just thinking about whether I already had something, but it's not important. Thank you for asking me - I'll see you tonight." Co-worker: (Pleasantly surprised) "Great! We'll see you then! ... uh - Her name is Colleen, just so you know." The New You: "OK. See you then. Mmm. Colleen..." (smiling quietly to yourself) Force yourself to do new things. Having new, different experiences helps you learn to cope with new situations, and it builds your self-confidence, which helps you become a more decisive person. Often, hesitance and indecisive behaviours are caused by having lived a sheltered existence, or not having much experience to draw on. Allowing yourself to go to parties or gatherings, or even just going to meetings, conventions, or the movies with different people, broadens your horizons a little bit every time you do it. You hear the stories others tell, and you soon have some stories of your own to tell. As you become more experienced, you will be more certain of what will happen in different circumstances. Being more certain = being less hesitant.In most areas of life, the "best" at something doesn't make them the "best" leader. Rodgers might be putting up better stats, that doesn't mean he's a better leader then Favre. TO is one of the best WRs in the league, does that make him a great leader? He might be the most phyiscally gifted person on the Cowboys, but he's an awful leader. But he plays great, produces, works hard. But again, horrible leader.

The claim isn't that Rodgers is a better leader than Favre, it's the opposite. So that's why I ask, of that huge essay you posted, can you point to anything that Favre does than Rodgers does not? Anything in there that would explain why these packers would be playing better if Favre was providing leadership rather than Rodgers?And that part about making decisions and living with the consequences and not making excuses or justifications is golden. I bet when Rodgers retires, he'll be more decisive than Favre was. At least Favre is leading in the excuses and justifications column.

You are one angry and bitter Favre hater.

 

[Stinger Ray]

There is so much more to leadership than players giving effort.

Really? Like what? Specifically please.

Are you serious? I suggest you google leadership in sports and educate yourself.http://www.money-zine.com/Career-Developme...ship-in-Sports/

I rather have you educate me on how exactly Favre's leadership would be making the difference with this year's Packers.No, wait, that's an intangible.

To answer my question specifically, you'd have to be able to point to examples of where Favre's leadership made a difference in the past and then compare that to where Rodger's leadership currently does not provide that same difference.

Instead, you link to an article that contains this nugget of wisdom... for COACHES...

"As a coach or a manager, you're trying to motivate your "players" to reach their full potential." That kinda sounds to me like convincing players to give their best effort.

Then there are the "rules of leadership" as stated in the article...

Fortunately there are some simple rules that apply to all leadership situations, including sports:

-Treat players with respect and you will earn their respect.

-Try to understand each player on the team well enough to be able to identify their specific strengths and weaknesses.

-Lead by example - if you expect players to be on time, then you should never be late for a meeting yourself.

-Share your strategy with your players. It is much easier for players to support a strategy if they understand it.

-Remain decisive and confident. A coach's confidence can be contagious. If the players know that you believe in them, then they might start believing in themselves too.

-Finally, instruct players in a positive manner - tell them what you want them to do, not what you don't want them to do.

So ignoring the fact that your article applies to coaches and managers rather than QB's...

How did Favre treat players with respect in a way that Rodgers does not?

Was Favre better at understanding his teammates' strengths and weaknesses than Rodgers?

Does Favre do a better job of leading by example than Rodgers? Maybe he was leading tackling drills in 2007.

Did Favre do a better job of sharing his strategies with the team?

Well, we'll just skip over the decisive and confident rule...as FAvre did this offseason.

Maybe Favre instructed his teammates in a postive manner while Rodgers just cusses them like animals.

Any more insight into what leadership brings to the team?

Are you really this ignorant? You have to be to not acknowledge the leadership that Favre displayed on the field. Ask anyone that knows anything about the NFL and they will agree. You're hatred of Favre is really, really pathetic.

 

[teamroc]

The claim isn't that Rodgers is a better leader than Favre, it's the opposite. So that's why I ask, of that huge essay you posted, can you point to anything that Favre does than Rodgers does not? Anything in there that would explain why these packers would be playing better if Favre was providing leadership rather than Rodgers?And that part about making decisions and living with the consequences and not making excuses or justifications is golden. I bet when Rodgers retires, he'll be more decisive than Favre was. At least Favre is leading in the excuses and justifications column.

That's easy, Favre was the leader on the packers. Now there is no leader, and the team is a mess. Watch the team, read up on them, the in-fighting, blame game. This is a 13-3 team, who will be 6-10. And lack of leadership is a huge issue for them, and surprise the leader of the team last year is gone. It's not rocket science.

 

[Stinger Ray]

The claim isn't that Rodgers is a better leader than Favre, it's the opposite. So that's why I ask, of that huge essay you posted, can you point to anything that Favre does than Rodgers does not? Anything in there that would explain why these packers would be playing better if Favre was providing leadership rather than Rodgers?And that part about making decisions and living with the consequences and not making excuses or justifications is golden. I bet when Rodgers retires, he'll be more decisive than Favre was. At least Favre is leading in the excuses and justifications column.

That's easy, Favre was the leader on the packers. Now there is no leader, and the team is a mess. Watch the team, read up on them, the in-fighting, blame game. This is a 13-3 team, who will be 6-10. And lack of leadership is a huge issue for them, and surprise the leader of the team last year is gone. It's not rocket science.

 

[JamesTheScot]

if you deny Favre's leadership having any effect on this team at all you must also believe...That rivalries mean nothing to a players mindset and performance.That there is no such thing as bulletin board material.That defending a championship is just as easy as winning one.That the mental fatigue of a season has no effects on performance.That a good locker room has no effect on performance.That TO is not a cancer.

I don't think too many people are denying that.I deny its had enough of an effect to change this season from crap to any huge success though.

Why did the Cowboys look so good this weekend with Romo yet looked so bad early in the season with Romo?

The Cowboys started the season 4-1 and he got hurt at the end of the next game against Arizona. The team struggled when Romo wasn't in the lineup.

They lost to Washington and Arizona and beat Cleveland, Cincy, Green Bay and Philly. What are the records of those teams they got W's against? They gave up lots of points to Philly and Arizona and too many to Cincy. Sure, Romo had nice stats, but what kind of leadership was he providing to the rest of team (and the D) when after 6 weeks they have almost matched their loss total from 2007 with the tough part of their schedule still to get through? To say this team hasn't regressed this season, despite being largely unchanged, would be crazy, right? To be blaming the QB for the difference in how other players are producing despite the fact that he is putting up nice stats, comparable to last year in fact, isn't crazy is it?

 

[Phase of the Game]

if you deny Favre's leadership having any effect on this team at all you must also believe...That rivalries mean nothing to a players mindset and performance.That there is no such thing as bulletin board material.That defending a championship is just as easy as winning one.That the mental fatigue of a season has no effects on performance.That a good locker room has no effect on performance.That TO is not a cancer.

I don't think too many people are denying that.I deny its had enough of an effect to change this season from crap to any huge success though.

Why did the Cowboys look so good this weekend with Romo yet looked so bad early in the season with Romo?

The Cowboys started the season 4-1 and he got hurt at the end of the next game against Arizona. The team struggled when Romo wasn't in the lineup.

They lost to Washington and Arizona and beat Cleveland, Cincy, Green Bay and Philly. What are the records of those teams they got W's against? They gave up lots of points to Philly and Arizona and too many to Cincy. Sure, Romo had nice stats, but what kind of leadership was he providing to the rest of team (and the D) when after 6 weeks they have almost matched their loss total from 2007 with the tough part of their schedule still to get through? To say this team hasn't regressed this season, despite being largely unchanged, would be crazy, right? To be blaming the QB for the difference in how other players are producing despite the fact that he is putting up nice stats, comparable to last year in fact, isn't crazy is it?

I think you're nuts.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

It's obvious you have no concept of the leadership Favre displayed on the field while he played for the Packers.

Funny, I was going to accuse you of having no concept of the leadership Favre or Rodgers display on or off the field because you seem completely unable to define it or describe it despite your asserting that Favre has it and Rodgers lacks it. I certainly understand that it's "intangible" enough that you or any other pro-Favre or anti-Thompson partisan can toss it out there as a Rodger's deficiency and never have to back it up with anything concrete.

 

[Phase of the Game]

A quote from Leon Washington....

"When you have Brett Favre coming into the huddle, it makes everybody else in the huddle step their games up"

Jerico Cotchery

"It is very special to have a guy like that step into your huddle"

Eric Mangini

" I think Brett just . . . he instills confidence in the group ... There's a sense of ease when he has the ball. You feel he's going to get it to the right place."

From another player

"I didn't see any nervousness on his face; I saw a quiet confidence on his face, so to speak. When he stepped into the huddle, we knew we were going to be able to get it done because that's the way he's been this entire year."

http://www.daylife.com/quote/0fav1s56wI8vz

 

[Phase of the Game]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

It's obvious you have no concept of the leadership Favre displayed on the field while he played for the Packers.

Funny, I was going to accuse you of having no concept of the leadership Favre or Rodgers display on or off the field because you seem completely unable to define it or describe it despite your asserting that Favre has it and Rodgers lacks it. I certainly understand that it's "intangible" enough that you or any other pro-Favre or anti-Thompson partisan can toss it out there as a Rodger's deficiency and never have to back it up with anything concrete.

The reasons Brett Favre’s retirement filled a 24-hour news cycle are obvious. He was larger than life to the networks because he made good television. No – great, compelling television. Favre had a common denominator with America because he played quarterback the way it was played before coaches stopped trusting anything but their playbook and their tendency charts, scripting the position tighter than a White House press conference. Favre was a superstar who somehow made Joe Blow believe that if Joe Blow were magically transported to Lambeau Field, that’s exactly the way he’d play quarterback – by the seat of his pants. That’s why even after losing seasons the Packers would show up on “Monday Night Football” three times the following year, right there with the Patriots and the Cowboys and the Colts and the teams Las Vegas had pegged as Super Bowl favorites.

But the reason Favre was an NFL legend can be boiled down to one word: leadership.

The surest formula for building a winner in sports – and this goes for pro sports right down to the grass-roots level of organized sports first taken as serious competition – is to find a great player who wants to win more than anyone else and fill in around him.

That was Favre. A great player who wanted to win more than teammates who by the end were practically young enough to be his children. Not everybody has the flicker of competitive fire within him, not even at the pro level. Some people are so outrageously gifted athletically that they ride the conveyor belt through high school and college to the pros without ever really loving the game they play.

But if there’s so much as a lone ember present, then a firebrand competitor like Favre atop a team’s leadership pyramid makes anything – anything – possible. The onus is then on management to find a certain type of player. Not always the most talented, necessarily, but players whose skills will be fully drawn out because Favre will fan the competitive flame.

You know who gets that as clearly as any executive in pro sports today? Joe Dumars. He understood it intuitively as a player and came to learn it as an executive in short order. If he doesn’t sense a prospect, no matter his talent level, holds winning in the proper light – boom! He’s off the draft board. Same when considering trade possibilities.

Take Juan Dixon. Fairly unremarkable NBA career so far, maybe, and perhaps his physical limitations will prevent him from ever being a full-time starter. But I covered the 2002 Final Four when Dixon led Maryland to the title. There were other very good players on that team, but I left Atlanta struck by the thought that it was Dixon who – like Favre with the Packers – was the one fanning the flame, the player who worked his craft so hard he shamed lesser players around him into pouring their souls into the effort as well. It was Dixon who wore his will as clearly as he wore a Terrapins uniform.

Someone who pushes his teammates like that doesn’t just “bring out the best” in them – he prods them to keep expanding the limits of what they could never have imagined their best might be.

When Favre arrived in Green Bay, the Packers had been adrift for two decades, competitively linked in the old NFC Central Black and Blue Division with the Lions. Green Bay and Detroit were on equal footing back then and, truth be told, most impartial NFL general managers would have taken Detroit’s future over Green Bay’s because of the presence of Barry Sanders.

Those two teams slugged it out in their ascendancy in the mid-’90s, at which point the Packers won two playoff games over the Lions and, ultimately, won one Super Bowl and came close in another, while the Lions – saddled not only by aimless management but an indifferent superstar – reverted to form. The Packers wound up getting far more accomplished in the Favre era than the Lions have in the 50 years since Bobby Layne, a kindred spirit, left town.

That’s a substantial reason the teams headed in opposite directions – the difference between Favre and Sanders. Sanders was a jaw-dropping talent, one of the five most exciting players in the game’s history with the football under his arm.

But his influence ended where his talent did. There was no spillover effect with Barry Sanders. He didn’t spur anyone else to greatness, didn’t push anyone to probe the limits of their ability. His teammates were awed, not inspired, by Barry Sanders. The minicamps he routinely skipped over his coach’s wishes spoke to his lack of leadership. A leader would have understood the effects such a public slap at his coach would have on players of lesser status.

It wasn’t enough that Sanders ran the hills with Jerry Rice in the summer and showed up at training camp in tip-top shape, his endurance shaming free-agent rookies hoping to crack the roster. It was OK for Rice, who had Joe Montana and a winning culture in place. Sanders needed to be in Detroit, changing the culture and holding management’s feet to the fire to match his commitment, the same way Favre was in Green Bay, changing that culture emphatically.

Dumars pulled the Pistons from the muck of the ’90s by laying a foundation, one brick at a time. No superstar – no Favre, no Sanders – fell into his lap. In his one-year apprenticeship under Rick Sund, the bridge season between player and president’s hats, Dumars encouraged Sund to sign Michael Curry as a free agent.

That was the modest start of the character makeover of the Pistons, which would continue with the acquisitions of bedrock leaders like Ben Wallace and Corliss Williamson and continue through Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton and has every chance to extend out to the horizon on the backs of players like Jason Maxiell and Arron Afflalo and Rodney Stuckey and Amir Johnson, flat-out gym rats who’ll follow obligingly until ready to assume the mantel of leadership from veterans who’ve set shining examples.

Today there are very few teams in the NBA that match the Pistons for their selflessness and their synergy, players whose passion for winning compounds, making the whole greater than the sum of its parts.

There is no Brett Favre within their locker room – no lightning rod, no unquestioned leader, no universal inspiration. That’s the surest way to build a winner, but it takes that rare someone with the combination of physical skills atop charisma atop unsurpassed competitiveness. The last player in the NBA who met that criteria? Some would argue for Kobe Bryant and others would suggest the future is LeBron James. Michael Jordan is the last one we can say had it all for sure, on the heels of Magic Johnson and Larry Bird.

Isiah Thomas, it could be argued, belonged in that company. His generation of Pistons, the Bad Boys, featured the greatest concentration of cutthroat competitors I’ve ever been around.

Thomas is lionized for his competitive fire, and rightly so, but he had plenty of peers to his left and right. Chuck Daly always said the gushing over Thomas’ leadership short-changed Bill Laimbeer. Rick Mahorn, Dennis Rodman, Vinnie Johnson, et al. And Joe Dumars, who inherited his father’s boundless work ethic and steely resolve, treasured characteristics in his native rural Louisiana, a stone’s throw from where a certain Green Bay quarterback traces his roots. Joe D was as stoic as Thomas was volcanic, but had a competitive fire whose flame burned as brightly as any of them.

That’s what he looks for now every time he scouts a player or ponders a trade or studies his team. Minus his Michael Jordan or Magic Johnson, Joe Dumars built a collective, cultivated creatively and dutifully and forcefully. It’s the kind of group Brett Favre would’ve loved to call his teammate

http://www.nba.com/pistons/news/langlois_blog_080307.html

 

[Mario Kart]

The claim isn't that Rodgers is a better leader than Favre, it's the opposite. So that's why I ask, of that huge essay you posted, can you point to anything that Favre does than Rodgers does not? Anything in there that would explain why these packers would be playing better if Favre was providing leadership rather than Rodgers?And that part about making decisions and living with the consequences and not making excuses or justifications is golden. I bet when Rodgers retires, he'll be more decisive than Favre was. At least Favre is leading in the excuses and justifications column.

This is easy. First, you are underestimating what a leader means to a team. What effect that player has, not only to his side of the ball, but the team in general.Second, players respect Favre, offense, defense, opponents respect what he brought to the table. With that respect came an urgency to play better because that leader made the team better.Lastly, when Favre stepped onto the field, the team, the opponents saw a guy who could win the game at any time in the last drive. Favre could beat any team, at any time. The opponents knew this and the team knew this. That same sense of urgency is not there with Rodgers... at all.

 

[Phase of the Game]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

It's obvious you have no concept of the leadership Favre displayed on the field while he played for the Packers.

Funny, I was going to accuse you of having no concept of the leadership Favre or Rodgers display on or off the field because you seem completely unable to define it or describe it despite your asserting that Favre has it and Rodgers lacks it. I certainly understand that it's "intangible" enough that you or any other pro-Favre or anti-Thompson partisan can toss it out there as a Rodger's deficiency and never have to back it up with anything concrete.

Jets QB Has Still Got It print Chrissy Mauck

December 03, 2008

The last time the 49ers saw Brett Favre, the then-Packers QB threw for 293 yards and a pair of touchdowns in a 30-19 Green Bay win.

Linebacker Takeo Spikes’ first ever encounter with Jets quarterback Brett Favre occurred in September of his rookie season with the Cincinnati Bengals. It was a meeting that led to the 49ers starting inside backer’s first-ever sack, and one he remembers vividly.

The sack took place with 1:53 left in the game at the Bengals 33-yardline when Spikes dropped Favre for a 12-yard sack on a 4th and 3 play. Unfortunately, it was a Green Bay 13-6 eventual victory as Favre’s magic prevailed.

As it still does, ten years later, and with a different green team to play for these days.

“He’s still got it,” said Spikes of the Jets quarterback. “He can throw the ball just as good.”

The Jets trade for Favre has proven to be instrumental in their turn-around from a team that picked in the top ten in this year’s NFL Draft, to the top of the AFC East with a one game lead.

“I just think up until this point now, you take into account everything that he’s accomplished in the previous years, and just by him being there with the Jets, his presence alone makes that team better. You can see it,” said Spikes.

49ers starting safety Mark Roman saw Favre’s leadership and influence first-hand when he played with him back in Green Bay.

“He’s just a real cool guy to be around,” said Roman. “He’s a guy who boosts morale in the locker room and helps you believe that you can win when you are on the offensive side of the ball. I’m sure his receivers feel that there isn’t any place he can’t pull the ball, so I have to stay alive, I have to keep working, because in any given situation he can get the ball. You tend to believe in a guy like that. Obviously with them turning it around like they have this year, a lot of guys on offense are believing in him.”

Favre has undoubtedly helped ignite the Jets offense, but he’s not perfect. His 20 touchdowns are six more than his 14 interceptions on the year, yet Favre is known for taking risks.

“I can remember when I was playing in Green Bay and some days you’d be thinking, ‘Man, I wish I was playing against Brett right now,’ because sometimes he has those kind of games, but you can’t go into Sunday hoping or wishing that, that Brett shows up. He could be either really good, or he could throw you a few.”

Other than one ball in the end zone that Roman admitted to botching in the Rams game, the 49ers starting safety hasn’t been on the receiving end of too many gift-wrapped interceptions this season.

“I look at some film and it’s like, ‘Why can’t I get into situations like that?’ I watch Green Bay, because I played there and I’m familiar with the guys, so I always look to see what they’re doing. A lot of times it’s just like the quarterback is throwing them the ball. I’m like, ‘Why can’t I get them like that?’ It’s like he’s just sitting there, what is the quarterback looking at? And I’m not getting those. Mike (Lewis) isn’t getting them either. It’s just frustrating to say the least.”

http://49ers.com/pressbox/news_detail.php?...ction=PR%20News

 

[JamesTheScot]

Favre sensed that Thompson didn't want him back and I think that is one of the main reasons that Favre decided to retire Favre unretired. Because he was angry that TT didn't beg him to come back. Brett admitted tried to explain away his own words from his own retirement press conference by trying to convince us he wasn't ready to announce his retirement when he did.

I fixed it for you.

How is that leadership in sports studying going for ya?

Apparently as well as that logic class did for you. Can I expect some substantive, logical disagreement with my position in your reply or should I just mark you down for an ad hominem?

 

[Phase of the Game]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

It's obvious you have no concept of the leadership Favre displayed on the field while he played for the Packers.

Funny, I was going to accuse you of having no concept of the leadership Favre or Rodgers display on or off the field because you seem completely unable to define it or describe it despite your asserting that Favre has it and Rodgers lacks it. I certainly understand that it's "intangible" enough that you or any other pro-Favre or anti-Thompson partisan can toss it out there as a Rodger's deficiency and never have to back it up with anything concrete.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/21016402/Favre providing leadership to young Pack

Veteran QB thriving with one of NFL’s youngest teams (average age: 26)

GREEN BAY, Wis. - Maybe what the Green Bay Packers needed was adult supervision. Their superstar quarterback is providing it.

Playing on the youngest team in the NFL, Favre certainly has had moments of frustration with his fresh-faced teammates. But Favre’s insistence on holding young players to a high standard right away has helped the Packers to their surprising 3-0 start.

Favre, who might break Dan Marino’s all-time record for touchdown passes on Sunday at Minnesota, isn’t about to charm the youngsters. After all, he says, former Packers coach Mike Holmgren never coddled him.

“Mike Holmgren never patted me on the back and said, ’That’s OK, buddy.’ There was never any of that. He laid into me every time,” Favre said. “And I can’t tell you how many times I came off the field and said, ’I hate this guy.’

“But as I look back, he meant more to my career than anyone. He was hard on me, but I see him now and I thank him for all those things.”

Favre, who needs one touchdown pass to break the record of 420 he shares with Marino, will start his 241st consecutive game. That will break a tie with former Vikings center Mick Tingelhoff for the second-longest streak in NFL history.

He now is paying Holmgren’s favor forward to the Packers’ young players. Favre knows he’s running out of time to make one last playoff run, and wants his teammates to understand that every play matters.

“I think a lot of our guys, and I think they work extremely hard,” Favre said. “But there’s not many second chances in this game, and one play can be the determining factor in whether you win or lose. And there’s no one who knows better than me.”

One of Favre’s first targets this season is rookie wide receiver James Jones.

Jones, a third-round draft pick out of San Jose State, catches just about anything thrown his way. But like any rookie, he sometimes doesn’t end up quite where the quarterback expects him to.

Favre got flustered with Jones twice during a preseason game against Jacksonville, waving his arms and motioning at Jones in frustration. It was a humbling moment for a rookie still slightly dazzled by the bright lights of Lambeau Field, but Jones knew it wasn’t personal.

“There’s no hard feelings,” Jones said. “I don’t get mad at that or nothing — ’I hate you Brett,’ or nothing like that. It’s all right.”

And Favre certainly got his attention.

“You learn from everything,” said Jones, who ranks second to Donald Driver in catches and yards receiving through three games for the Packers. “Early on, I was cutting off routes and things like that. All it was was some miscommunication. As you can see, we’re better now.”

Favre makes no apologies for showing up Jones on the field, but said he would much rather handle such things during practice.

“What am I supposed to do? I don’t want to go out there and come across as pointing fingers and things like that, but if a guy’s got to keep coming, you keep coming,” Favre said. “If a guy’s got to keep going, you do those things. But I would much rather do them on the practice field, I would much rather do it in meetings, because come gametime, we have to play.”

Hall of Fame quarterback Troy Aikman said Favre’s frustration is only natural, but his continued enthusiasm on the field sets the right example for young players.

“I do think it is frustrating for him,” said Aikman, now an analyst for Fox Sports. “But at the same time, in a lot of ways, he’s the right guy to be bringing those guys along, because he is still excited about football.”

Second-year guard Daryn Colledge said Favre doesn’t often chew out young players, but does make it clear he expects them to match his competitiveness.

“If you’re not giving it 100 percent, he’s going to remind you,” Colledge said. “And when he needs you to make a play, he’s going to let you know. You respect that, and it drives you to want to be better. I mean, I don’t want to be the guy that gets Brett hurt. I don’t even want to be the guy that gets Brett touched. So it pushes me every day to be a better offensive lineman.”

There was a time when Favre was one of the guys, going hunting with teammates and pulling pranks in the locker room.

Today, he’s more like one of the grown-ups.

Even with Favre, who turns 38 next month, skewing the Packers’ demographics, Green Bay’s opening-day roster was the NFL’s youngest. Average age: 26 years, 89 days.

Favre doesn’t have much in common with players who were in grade school when he was traded to the Packers in 1992. He doesn’t really socialize with teammates off the field and even dresses in his own private room away from the Packers’ main locker room.

“We don’t have coffee chats in the morning,” Favre joked.

But when it comes to team meetings and watching film, Jones said Favre is anything but aloof.

“We don’t hang out or go out to restaurants and eat dinner or nothing like that,” Jones said. “But when we’re in the meeting room and it’s business, we all talk amongst each other and things like that.”

Packers coach Mike McCarthy often has the quarterbacks and receivers meet together after practice to spur conversation and build chemistry.

“I ask Brett questions on purpose just to make him talk,” McCarthy said. “I know he knows the answer — make him talk, make him interact. It’s more about the things that go wrong, because it’s an opportunity for everyone to learn.”

McCarthy considers Favre the ultimate role model, given his consecutive starts streak and the fact he and won his 149th game as a starting quarterback two weeks ago to break John Elway’s career record.

You’re able to point to your quarterback: ’This player here has been available more than any other player in the history of the National Football League.’ That helps, it’s an excellent example there,” McCarthy said. “Accountability? He’s won more games than anybody in the history of football.”

Now Favre is after Marino’s mark, the Packers are trying to return to the playoffs — and none of the young players wants to be the one who messes it up.

“We’re held up to a different standard,” Colledge said. “Brett’s one of the best quarterbacks in the country, and he’s proved that week in and week out for the last 17 years. It’s just a matter of, if we give him time, he’s going to be successful. And you want to be the guy who’s giving Brett time. You want to be a part of that success.”

 

[Ookie Pringle]

Favre sensed that Thompson didn't want him back and I think that is one of the main reasons that Favre decided to retire Favre unretired. Because he was angry that TT didn't beg him to come back. Brett admitted tried to explain away his own words from his own retirement press conference by trying to convince us he wasn't ready to announce his retirement when he did.

I fixed it for you.

How is that leadership in sports studying going for ya?

Apparently as well as that logic class did for you. Can I expect some substantive, logical disagreement with my position in your reply or should I just mark you down for an ad hominem?

I'd say it looks like you are getting

 

[Phase of the Game]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

It's obvious you have no concept of the leadership Favre displayed on the field while he played for the Packers.

Funny, I was going to accuse you of having no concept of the leadership Favre or Rodgers display on or off the field because you seem completely unable to define it or describe it despite your asserting that Favre has it and Rodgers lacks it. I certainly understand that it's "intangible" enough that you or any other pro-Favre or anti-Thompson partisan can toss it out there as a Rodger's deficiency and never have to back it up with anything concrete.

"If we were in a bar and everyone was in there and someone walked through the door and said, 'I want to talk to the man,' they'd take you to Brett Favre." --Former Packers defensive tackle Gilbert Brown, on Favre's leadership.

"The thing that impresses me the most is what kind of a man and leader he has become off the field since I have known him. I have taken great joy in watching him develop as a person and father -- perhaps even more so -- than as a coach watching his quarterback."

--Former Packers coach Mike Holmgren, in a statement released by the Seahawks and reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

"I have no idea, I have no clue ... It's kind of scary. Brett's been the leader since I've been here and he's a great guy, great teammate, great everything. So it will definitely be different. I wouldn't even know what to expect."

--Packers defensive tackle Ryan Pickett, on what life after Favre would be like, as reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

"Throughout his 17 years, he never lost that feeling of playing the game for the first time. That's what makes Brett Favre unlike any other player I have ever seen."

--Former Packers assistant and current NFL Network analyst Steve Mariucci, as reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

"His style of play was as unique as it was effective. ... I admired his skills, his leadership, and especially his love for playing the game. You knew he was having fun when he played, and that made him fun to watch. He set the standard at the position for a long time."

Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo, as reported by the Associated Press.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=371836

 

[JamesTheScot]

Thompson NEVER checked with Favre prior to his retirement. You can blame Favre all you want but to say "the whole mess is the fault of Favre" is laughable. Ted Thompson is at fault in the mess too!

Wow. Let me make sure I understand your position.AFTER Favre tells the Packer organization that he wants to retire, TT is at fault for not "checking" with Favre BEFORE the retirement news conference to make sure Favre wants to retire?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre was too cowardly to speak up if he had changed his mind?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre would say one thing at the conference and cry convincingly about it but yet not really mean it?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that "yes" means "no" with Favre and Favre had no choice but to follow through with the retirement press conference even though Favre didn't really want to?Everytime I order for my five year-old at a restaurant I run through this drill. I ask what he wants to drink. He tells me. Then I ask him if he's sure BEFORE I place the order. But of course he's five and I don't ask him to provide leadership to my pro football team.So TT is at fault for not treating Favre like a five year-old.So how many times was TT supposed to ask Favre the question before he could assume Favre was telling him the truth?

It is obvious you have a negative bias against Favre when you equate him to a five year old. WOW!Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that Thompson didn't want Favre back when most every NFL insider has?

I have a negative bias against a 40 year old that acts like a 5 year old. If that's the charge, I'll plead. I think it's within the realm of possibility that the Packer front office was sick of it too and were ready to move on. All the crap TO and CJ take for being a distraction to their team but yet Favre can drag his "will I or won't I" drama out for months, and presumably on into training camp, but yet he gets a pass.I have no problem acknowledging that TT may not have wanted Favre back. But so what? I also know as an adult that I don't always get what I want and have to make concessions or compromises in my job. I sometimes have to work with people I don't particularly care for but I try to show some "leadership" and get the job done regardless. If Favre decided he wanted to come back earlier in the year, TT WOULD have taken him back. Instead, Favre keeps jerking them around and TT finally says enough.

 

[Da Guru]

I drafted Farve late on two of my teams thinking that he would be the Farve of old.

Farve had one fluke 6 TD game. Other than that I think he has a 14-17 INT ratio, has not thrown for 300 yards in a single game, had had 3 games without a TD pass, and for the most part looks like an old QB.

Farve was one of the all-time greats, but the Farve of today is not even close to a great QB.

Rodgers has a future, Farve only has a past.

The Pack drafted Rodgers three years ago because Farve kept saying how tired he was.

 

[Phase of the Game]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

It's obvious you have no concept of the leadership Favre displayed on the field while he played for the Packers.

Funny, I was going to accuse you of having no concept of the leadership Favre or Rodgers display on or off the field because you seem completely unable to define it or describe it despite your asserting that Favre has it and Rodgers lacks it. I certainly understand that it's "intangible" enough that you or any other pro-Favre or anti-Thompson partisan can toss it out there as a Rodger's deficiency and never have to back it up with anything concrete.

From Favre..Favre defined his ideas on leadership for the magazine: "It's somehow getting 52 other guys to raise their level of play. To get them to believe in what we're trying to do. You do that by setting an example, by doing things the right way. I've always shown up. I've always been prepared. I practice every day. I practice hard. I study. No matter what happens on the field, I never point blame at anybody else. Everything I do comes back to leadership, the example I want to set."

http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/jan/11...ers_brett27265/

 

[Ookie Pringle]

Exactly. All Farve had to say after last year was "We had a great year and I can`t wait to get to camp" The Packers would have welcomed him back.

Instead Farve did what he has done the last 3-4 years..and sometimes he did it in season. Saying " I am tired, I am not sure I can prepare like I used to. The game is draining."

Is that what you want to hear if you are the Packers?

I like Farve, but he was as much or more to blame for this than the Packers.

Isn't it wonderful the leadership Favre brought to the team...Locker apart from the rest of the team...

No mentoring...

Not wanting to invest as much time preparing as before...

Being tired of being depended on...

No wonder the team is struggling. Clearly Favre was showing them what it takes to win in the NFL.

It's obvious you have no concept of the leadership Favre displayed on the field while he played for the Packers.

Funny, I was going to accuse you of having no concept of the leadership Favre or Rodgers display on or off the field because you seem completely unable to define it or describe it despite your asserting that Favre has it and Rodgers lacks it. I certainly understand that it's "intangible" enough that you or any other pro-Favre or anti-Thompson partisan can toss it out there as a Rodger's deficiency and never have to back it up with anything concrete.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/21016402/Favre providing leadership to young Pack

Veteran QB thriving with one of NFL’s youngest teams (average age: 26)

GREEN BAY, Wis. - Maybe what the Green Bay Packers needed was adult supervision. Their superstar quarterback is providing it.

Playing on the youngest team in the NFL, Favre certainly has had moments of frustration with his fresh-faced teammates. But Favre’s insistence on holding young players to a high standard right away has helped the Packers to their surprising 3-0 start.

Favre, who might break Dan Marino’s all-time record for touchdown passes on Sunday at Minnesota, isn’t about to charm the youngsters. After all, he says, former Packers coach Mike Holmgren never coddled him.

“Mike Holmgren never patted me on the back and said, ’That’s OK, buddy.’ There was never any of that. He laid into me every time,” Favre said. “And I can’t tell you how many times I came off the field and said, ’I hate this guy.’

“But as I look back, he meant more to my career than anyone. He was hard on me, but I see him now and I thank him for all those things.”

Favre, who needs one touchdown pass to break the record of 420 he shares with Marino, will start his 241st consecutive game. That will break a tie with former Vikings center Mick Tingelhoff for the second-longest streak in NFL history.

He now is paying Holmgren’s favor forward to the Packers’ young players. Favre knows he’s running out of time to make one last playoff run, and wants his teammates to understand that every play matters.

“I think a lot of our guys, and I think they work extremely hard,” Favre said. “But there’s not many second chances in this game, and one play can be the determining factor in whether you win or lose. And there’s no one who knows better than me.”

One of Favre’s first targets this season is rookie wide receiver James Jones.

Jones, a third-round draft pick out of San Jose State, catches just about anything thrown his way. But like any rookie, he sometimes doesn’t end up quite where the quarterback expects him to.

Favre got flustered with Jones twice during a preseason game against Jacksonville, waving his arms and motioning at Jones in frustration. It was a humbling moment for a rookie still slightly dazzled by the bright lights of Lambeau Field, but Jones knew it wasn’t personal.

“There’s no hard feelings,” Jones said. “I don’t get mad at that or nothing — ’I hate you Brett,’ or nothing like that. It’s all right.”

And Favre certainly got his attention.

“You learn from everything,” said Jones, who ranks second to Donald Driver in catches and yards receiving through three games for the Packers. “Early on, I was cutting off routes and things like that. All it was was some miscommunication. As you can see, we’re better now.”

Favre makes no apologies for showing up Jones on the field, but said he would much rather handle such things during practice.

“What am I supposed to do? I don’t want to go out there and come across as pointing fingers and things like that, but if a guy’s got to keep coming, you keep coming,” Favre said. “If a guy’s got to keep going, you do those things. But I would much rather do them on the practice field, I would much rather do it in meetings, because come gametime, we have to play.”

Hall of Fame quarterback Troy Aikman said Favre’s frustration is only natural, but his continued enthusiasm on the field sets the right example for young players.

“I do think it is frustrating for him,” said Aikman, now an analyst for Fox Sports. “But at the same time, in a lot of ways, he’s the right guy to be bringing those guys along, because he is still excited about football.”

Second-year guard Daryn Colledge said Favre doesn’t often chew out young players, but does make it clear he expects them to match his competitiveness.

“If you’re not giving it 100 percent, he’s going to remind you,” Colledge said. “And when he needs you to make a play, he’s going to let you know. You respect that, and it drives you to want to be better. I mean, I don’t want to be the guy that gets Brett hurt. I don’t even want to be the guy that gets Brett touched. So it pushes me every day to be a better offensive lineman.”

There was a time when Favre was one of the guys, going hunting with teammates and pulling pranks in the locker room.

Today, he’s more like one of the grown-ups.

Even with Favre, who turns 38 next month, skewing the Packers’ demographics, Green Bay’s opening-day roster was the NFL’s youngest. Average age: 26 years, 89 days.

Favre doesn’t have much in common with players who were in grade school when he was traded to the Packers in 1992. He doesn’t really socialize with teammates off the field and even dresses in his own private room away from the Packers’ main locker room.

“We don’t have coffee chats in the morning,” Favre joked.

But when it comes to team meetings and watching film, Jones said Favre is anything but aloof.

“We don’t hang out or go out to restaurants and eat dinner or nothing like that,” Jones said. “But when we’re in the meeting room and it’s business, we all talk amongst each other and things like that.”

Packers coach Mike McCarthy often has the quarterbacks and receivers meet together after practice to spur conversation and build chemistry.

“I ask Brett questions on purpose just to make him talk,” McCarthy said. “I know he knows the answer — make him talk, make him interact. It’s more about the things that go wrong, because it’s an opportunity for everyone to learn.”

McCarthy considers Favre the ultimate role model, given his consecutive starts streak and the fact he and won his 149th game as a starting quarterback two weeks ago to break John Elway’s career record.

You’re able to point to your quarterback: ’This player here has been available more than any other player in the history of the National Football League.’ That helps, it’s an excellent example there,” McCarthy said. “Accountability? He’s won more games than anybody in the history of football.”

Now Favre is after Marino’s mark, the Packers are trying to return to the playoffs — and none of the young players wants to be the one who messes it up.

“We’re held up to a different standard,” Colledge said. “Brett’s one of the best quarterbacks in the country, and he’s proved that week in and week out for the last 17 years. It’s just a matter of, if we give him time, he’s going to be successful. And you want to be the guy who’s giving Brett time. You want to be a part of that success.”

 

[Mario Kart]

I drafted Farve late on two of my teams thinking that he would be the Farve of old.Farve had one fluke 6 TD game. Other than that I think he has a 14-17 INT ratio, has not thrown for 300 yards in a single game, had had 3 games without a TD pass, and for the most part looks like an old QB.Farve was one of the all-time greats, but the Farve of today is not even close to a great QB.Rodgers has a future, Farve only has a past. The Pack drafted Rodgers three years ago because Farve kept saying how tired he was.

Yes, because stats correlate directly to leadership. After all Favre is the Favre of old... he is winning.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Thompson NEVER checked with Favre prior to his retirement. You can blame Favre all you want but to say "the whole mess is the fault of Favre" is laughable. Ted Thompson is at fault in the mess too!

Wow. Let me make sure I understand your position.AFTER Favre tells the Packer organization that he wants to retire, TT is at fault for not "checking" with Favre BEFORE the retirement news conference to make sure Favre wants to retire?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre was too cowardly to speak up if he had changed his mind?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre would say one thing at the conference and cry convincingly about it but yet not really mean it?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that "yes" means "no" with Favre and Favre had no choice but to follow through with the retirement press conference even though Favre didn't really want to?Everytime I order for my five year-old at a restaurant I run through this drill. I ask what he wants to drink. He tells me. Then I ask him if he's sure BEFORE I place the order. But of course he's five and I don't ask him to provide leadership to my pro football team.So TT is at fault for not treating Favre like a five year-old.So how many times was TT supposed to ask Favre the question before he could assume Favre was telling him the truth?

TT is at fault for not researching and staying on top of what was best for the franchise. What is so hard to get?Favre was on freakin national TV hinting about playing for christ sake. His job is to pursue, recruit, sign, evaluate, negotiate, etc etc. Its called being a GM. Quite frankly this is probably why he rarely gets free agents. He doesnt know what he is doing. "Wait? I am supposed to call them?" He should have been on the phone with Favre every day. He should have sent Favre gift baskets if thats what it took. He was the face of the franchise that has had remarkable success. It was a smart business decision as well as the smart personnel decision. ITS HIS FREAKIN JOB.

Why would he recruit a guy who said he was retired? A free agent wants to play - by definition. Someone who just retired doesn't - by definition. What's so hard to get about that? Be a leader and take your stand, speak your mind and accept the consequences.Instead, Favre hinted. Nice leadership there. Can anyone find "Use Of The Hint" in these sports leadership artciles I'm hearing about? Of course, then he'd say he wasn't hinting. Then he'd say he wants to come back. Then he'd say he couldn't commit to coming back. Then he'd say he is really getting the itch but can't commit 100%.If Favre couldn't simply say "Yes, I'd like to play" when asked...and he was asked, repeatedly...hence the alleged "hint" then I see no one to blame but him.If Favre was so disenchanted with playing the game for the love of the game that he needed to be wooed by TT as that little something extra that would make it worth it to him to play, that would pretty much define him as a prima donna in my book.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

Thompson NEVER checked with Favre prior to his retirement. You can blame Favre all you want but to say "the whole mess is the fault of Favre" is laughable. Ted Thompson is at fault in the mess too!

Wow. Let me make sure I understand your position.AFTER Favre tells the Packer organization that he wants to retire, TT is at fault for not "checking" with Favre BEFORE the retirement news conference to make sure Favre wants to retire?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre was too cowardly to speak up if he had changed his mind?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre would say one thing at the conference and cry convincingly about it but yet not really mean it?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that "yes" means "no" with Favre and Favre had no choice but to follow through with the retirement press conference even though Favre didn't really want to?Everytime I order for my five year-old at a restaurant I run through this drill. I ask what he wants to drink. He tells me. Then I ask him if he's sure BEFORE I place the order. But of course he's five and I don't ask him to provide leadership to my pro football team.So TT is at fault for not treating Favre like a five year-old.So how many times was TT supposed to ask Favre the question before he could assume Favre was telling him the truth?

TT is at fault for not researching and staying on top of what was best for the franchise. What is so hard to get?Favre was on freakin national TV hinting about playing for christ sake. His job is to pursue, recruit, sign, evaluate, negotiate, etc etc. Its called being a GM. Quite frankly this is probably why he rarely gets free agents. He doesnt know what he is doing. "Wait? I am supposed to call them?" He should have been on the phone with Favre every day. He should have sent Favre gift baskets if thats what it took. He was the face of the franchise that has had remarkable success. It was a smart business decision as well as the smart personnel decision. ITS HIS FREAKIN JOB.

Why would he recruit a guy who said he was retired?

You missed the part of Thompson not having any contact with Favre prior to when he announced his retirement. I just wanted to clear that up. Now you can get back to being a hater.

 

[JamesTheScot]

So you don't have any issues that Thompson didn't speak to Favre once before he announced his retirement? Based on above it is obvious you don't.

No, I don't. Because I wouldn't want the "leader" of my team to be a guy that would retire/unretire based upon whether or not I begged him to come back!That's not a leader, that's an ego-driven prima donna! What's so hard to understand about that? I expect to take a man at his word, especially on what he wants to do with his life and family. If a guy wanted to retire because "he didn't have the heart or desire for it", I wouldn't want him playing for me. The signs were already there.Don't you guys understand that Favre is playing this year because this offseason controversy is what he needed to be motivated to play again? He isn't a Jet because he loved the game so much he couldn't let it go.

 

[Mario Kart]

So you don't have any issues that Thompson didn't speak to Favre once before he announced his retirement? Based on above it is obvious you don't.

No, I don't. Because I wouldn't want the "leader" of my team to be a guy that would retire/unretire based upon whether or not I begged him to come back!That's not a leader, that's an ego-driven prima donna! What's so hard to understand about that? I expect to take a man at his word, especially on what he wants to do with his life and family. If a guy wanted to retire because "he didn't have the heart or desire for it", I wouldn't want him playing for me. The signs were already there.Don't you guys understand that Favre is playing this year because this offseason controversy is what he needed to be motivated to play again? He isn't a Jet because he loved the game so much he couldn't let it go.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Thompson NEVER checked with Favre prior to his retirement. You can blame Favre all you want but to say "the whole mess is the fault of Favre" is laughable. Ted Thompson is at fault in the mess too!

Wow. Let me make sure I understand your position.AFTER Favre tells the Packer organization that he wants to retire, TT is at fault for not "checking" with Favre BEFORE the retirement news conference to make sure Favre wants to retire?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre was too cowardly to speak up if he had changed his mind?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that Favre would say one thing at the conference and cry convincingly about it but yet not really mean it?Would that be because TT was supposed to know that "yes" means "no" with Favre and Favre had no choice but to follow through with the retirement press conference even though Favre didn't really want to?Everytime I order for my five year-old at a restaurant I run through this drill. I ask what he wants to drink. He tells me. Then I ask him if he's sure BEFORE I place the order. But of course he's five and I don't ask him to provide leadership to my pro football team.So TT is at fault for not treating Favre like a five year-old.So how many times was TT supposed to ask Favre the question before he could assume Favre was telling him the truth?

TT is at fault for not researching and staying on top of what was best for the franchise. What is so hard to get?Favre was on freakin national TV hinting about playing for christ sake. His job is to pursue, recruit, sign, evaluate, negotiate, etc etc. Its called being a GM. Quite frankly this is probably why he rarely gets free agents. He doesnt know what he is doing. "Wait? I am supposed to call them?" He should have been on the phone with Favre every day. He should have sent Favre gift baskets if thats what it took. He was the face of the franchise that has had remarkable success. It was a smart business decision as well as the smart personnel decision. ITS HIS FREAKIN JOB.

Why would he recruit a guy who said he was retired? A free agent wants to play - by definition. Someone who just retired doesn't - by definition. What's so hard to get about that? Be a leader and take your stand, speak your mind and accept the consequences.Instead, Favre hinted. Nice leadership there. Can anyone find "Use Of The Hint" in these sports leadership artciles I'm hearing about? Of course, then he'd say he wasn't hinting. Then he'd say he wants to come back. Then he'd say he couldn't commit to coming back. Then he'd say he is really getting the itch but can't commit 100%.If Favre couldn't simply say "Yes, I'd like to play" when asked...and he was asked, repeatedly...hence the alleged "hint" then I see no one to blame but him.If Favre was so disenchanted with playing the game for the love of the game that he needed to be wooed by TT as that little something extra that would make it worth it to him to play, that would pretty much define him as a prima donna in my book.

So Favre didnt want to play? Obviously he did. I am 100% sure of it actually. I can link you to some box scores that prove I am 100% correct if you don't believe me. You can hide behind things all you want, but the bottom line is Favre wanted to play. TT didnt want him to play in GB. If TT did want him to play in GB he should have done a better job reading Favre. Again its his job. Try to explain it away all you want, but the only explanation is that either TT didnt want him or he sucks at his job or both.