Wiil Green Bay Cut Favre? (1 Viewer)

[Our Gang]

I think that this whole situation has played out very well for the Packers. I feel as if Green Bay really doesn't want Favre to return. The fans do, but the organizatoon doesn't. If they really did want Favre back, they would have signed some key free agents and built a team for this season. For fear of alienating the fans of Green Bay, they would never have considered cutting Favre. The orgination does have the right to know soon wether Favre will come back so they can plan for the draft, etc.... So Favre pops off and says "what are they going to do, cut me?". I am a dolphins fan and when Marino was near the end, if he made a remark like Favre did, then I would be ok with cutting him and not alienate my team. So this question is for the Packer's fans out there. Would you be ok with GB cutting Favre right now?

 

[sib]

I think that this whole situation has played out very well for the Packers. I feel as if Green Bay really doesn't want Favre to return. The fans do, but the organizatoon doesn't. If they really did want Favre back, they would have signed some key free agents and built a team for this season. For fear of alienating the fans of Green Bay, they would never have considered cutting Favre. The orgination does have the right to know soon wether Favre will come back so they can plan for the draft, etc.... So Favre pops off and says "what are they going to do, cut me?". I am a dolphins fan and when Marino was near the end, if he made a remark like Favre did, then I would be ok with cutting him and not alienate my team. So this question is for the Packer's fans out there. Would you be ok with GB cutting Favre right now?

Personally I've thought all along that both sides are "playing the game" to perfection. Obviously Favre still wants to play, but he knows the Packers are a sad-sack team. The GM in GB knows that Favre isn't part of the long-term future, but knows the PR hit for pushing a "legend" out would be severe. The way it's being played out now is a win-win situation for both parties. The GB organization can cut Favre saying that he left them with no choice (after delaying his decision over and over) and Favre can now be free to join a contending team, but not look like he abandoned GB by stating that he was cut..he didn't ask for his release.Win-win for both sides.

 

[Avery]

I think that this whole situation has played out very well for the Packers. I feel as if Green Bay really doesn't want Favre to return. The fans do, but the organizatoon doesn't. If they really did want Favre back, they would have signed some key free agents and built a team for this season. For fear of alienating the fans of Green Bay, they would never have considered cutting Favre. The orgination does have the right to know soon wether Favre will come back so they can plan for the draft, etc.... So Favre pops off and says "what are they going to do, cut me?". I am a dolphins fan and when Marino was near the end, if he made a remark like Favre did, then I would be ok with cutting him and not alienate my team. So this question is for the Packer's fans out there. Would you be ok with GB cutting Favre right now?

I don't see how being put in the position of possibly having to cut the most popular player in the history of the Packers and the face of the franchise and playing out well for Green Bay in any way.

 

[Sabertooth]

I read this morning that a decision announcement is emminent. Here is a chat transcript from CHRIS HAVEL. He is very close to the Favre family, having helped Brett and Bonita write their book. Plus reading between the lines on this new interview appears to point to Favre hanging them up.

edit- Actually this isn't a chat, it's an interview.

Havel Article and Interview with Favre

 

[pigskinliquors]

Unless Favre has been bluffing all along, he almost has to hang it up now. The Packers certainly haven't helped themselves in the off-season, and in drafting his successor last year, they showed that they are looking forward. I haven't seen a projected power ranking of teams for next year that doesn't have the Pack in the bottom third, and most off-season analyses suggest that the Pack has had one of the top five least productive off seasons. Favre has consistently stated that he's waiting to see if the front office makes a concerted effort to improve the team. The front office has not improved the team = (unless he's been bluffing) Favre is retiring.

 

[Sabertooth]

Unless Favre has been bluffing all along, he almost has to hang it up now. The Packers certainly haven't helped themselves in the off-season, and in drafting his successor last year, they showed that they are looking forward. I haven't seen a projected power ranking of teams for next year that doesn't have the Pack in the bottom third, and most off-season analyses suggest that the Pack has had one of the top five least productive off seasons. Favre has consistently stated that he's waiting to see if the front office makes a concerted effort to improve the team. The front office has not improved the team = (unless he's been bluffing) Favre is retiring.

What if they signed McNair (assuming he is cut)? That would be pretty wild. Same agent as Favre (Bus Cook).

 

[Verbal Kint]

How much do you drop Donald Driver's value if Favre retires? With Favre, I'd see Driver good for 1,200/8 as a baseline. With Rodgers, I have no idea. Maybe 1,000/5

 

[Sabertooth]

How much do you drop Donald Driver's value if Favre retires? With Favre, I'd see Driver good for 1,200/8 as a baseline. With Rodgers, I have no idea. Maybe 1,000/5

Oof, if that. Very good question. 850 - 4.

 

[Warhogs]

As a Packer fan I would have no poblem with them cutting him. If he wants to come back fine but I think Brett has already put GB in a bad spot by not deciding. Rodgers is not ready and the free agent market is drying up badly.

 

[Pipes]

As a Packer fan I would have no poblem with them cutting him.  If he wants to come back fine but I think Brett has already put GB in a bad spot by not deciding.  Rodgers is not ready and the free agent market is drying up badly.

Do you honestly think they'd have gone after a big time free agent if Favre had retired in January? No way in hell. They'd sign a backup type, which they still can easily do, but I don't believe they'd have brought someone in to start without giving Rodgers a shot.And no way does Thompson cut Favre. I can't believe anyone with any understanding of the NFL would even think that's a remote possibility. Favre's a notch below god in WI and cutting Favre would be the kiss of death for Thompson. Also for the record Favre has stated numerous times he doesn't want to play for anyone else.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

So does the NFL take back any of the 3 prime time games it gave a crummy GB team under the assumption that it would be Favre's last year?

 

[Warhogs]

Do you honestly think they'd have gone after a big time free agent if Favre had retired in January? No way in hell.

I did not say they would bring in a big time free agent. But I am positive they would bring in a decent stop gap while Rodgers develops or they find a future QB. Most of those guys have signed.

And no way does Thompson cut Favre. I can't believe anyone with any understanding of the NFL would even think that's a remote possibility. Favre's a notch below god in WI and cutting Favre would be the kiss of death for Thompson. Also for the record Favre has stated numerous times he doesn't want to play for anyone else.

The question was as a Packer fan would you be OK with them cutting Favre. I as a Packer fan would be OK with it.

If you are going to reply on a quote to me you could at least keep in mind what the topic was. I as a Packer fan would be fine with it.

 

[sho nuff]

As a Packer fan I would have no poblem with them cutting him.  If he wants to come back fine but I think Brett has already put GB in a bad spot by not deciding.  Rodgers is not ready and the free agent market is drying up badly.

Do you honestly think they'd have gone after a big time free agent if Favre had retired in January? No way in hell. They'd sign a backup type, which they still can easily do, but I don't believe they'd have brought someone in to start without giving Rodgers a shot.And no way does Thompson cut Favre. I can't believe anyone with any understanding of the NFL would even think that's a remote possibility. Favre's a notch below god in WI and cutting Favre would be the kiss of death for Thompson. Also for the record Favre has stated numerous times he doesn't want to play for anyone else.

Agreed as to what they would have done with another QB.Which QBs that are stop gap even have signed?

-Kitna...IMO never an option to come to GB as he wanted a starting job...not to back up Rodgers

-Brooks...ditto Kitna

-Rosenfals...hahahahaha!!!!!!

-McCown....perhaps and options...but IMO offers no more than Rodgers in his own limited and mediocre experience so far.

-Greise...probably the only option they may have really missed out on...but does that guy excite anyone (besides Bear fans) that much to be that worried about it?

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

So Favre pops off and says "what are they going to do, cut me?".

Favre addressed that comment and stated he wasn't serious and anyone close to him including the Packers knew he kidding. The comment was taken out of context and blown way out of proportion.There were reports on ESPN radio today that the team expects a decision by Favre either this weekend or by early next week.

 

[Kleck.]

So Favre pops off and says "what are they going to do, cut me?". 

Favre addressed that comment and stated he wasn't serious and anyone close to him including the Packers knew he kidding. The comment was taken out of context and blown way out of proportion.There were reports on ESPN radio today that the team expects a decision by Favre either this weekend or by early next week.

as always.

 

[amnesiac]

As a Packer fan I would have no poblem with them cutting him. If he wants to come back fine but I think Brett has already put GB in a bad spot by not deciding. Rodgers is not ready and the free agent market is drying up badly.

he hasn't helped matters, but he's not the one who drafted Rodgers.

 

[Warhogs]

I will say as a Packers fan that I am very concerned over Rodgers. As lost as he looked I am not at all confident he will ever make it as an NFL QB. Obviously it is too early to know this but he showed nothing to make me want to see him under center any time soon.

 

[Sabertooth]

I will say as a Packers fan that I am very concerned over Rodgers. As lost as he looked I am not at all confident he will ever make it as an NFL QB. Obviously it is too early to know this but he showed nothing to make me want to see him under center any time soon.

How would you feel about them drafting Young or Leinart if they slid to 5? Considering your doubts about Rodgers.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

I will say as a Packers fan that I am very concerned over Rodgers.  As lost as he looked I am not at all confident he will ever make it as an NFL QB.  Obviously it is too early to know this but he showed nothing to make me want to see him under center any time soon.

How would you feel about them drafting Young or Leinart if they slid to 5? Considering your doubts about Rodgers.

Based on comments from the organization and insiders it appears the Packers aren't sold on Rodgers.

 

[Sabertooth]

Thompson has stated that he is looking at Vince Young. And something about "you don't pass on Michael Jordan." Interesting.

 

[Warhogs]

I am hoping Green Bay drafts Hawke or Williams if available at 1.05 but I am not a big believer in drafting your QB of the future due to the high risk of failure. I would rather sign or trade for a 25-30 year old QB that is more ready to play.

 

[sho nuff]

Thompson has stated that he is looking at Vince Young. And something about "you don't pass on Michael Jordan." Interesting.

If people believe what a GM says before a draft...?Do you seriously expect Ted Thompson...a guy who is generally tight lipped about his picks....to leak that much of a clue?

Smoke screen...

A...he wants VY to be there at 5 to make that pick more valueable

B...he wants someone to jump ahead of GB to take VY and leave one of his guys on the board

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

This is timely:

http://www.packersnews.com/archives/news/pack_25499687.shtml

Question: Is it possible Favre is stalling in order to force the Packers to cut or trade him?

Answer: “I don’t want to play for anyone else. I never asked Ted Thompson to release me or trade me. I wouldn’t do it. It’s way too important for me to start over somewhere else, even if it’s for a year. I can’t believe people even think that. People who know me know that I’m as loyal as there is.”

Q. What did you mean by the comment, “What are the Packers going to do, cut me?”

A. “It was a joke. That’s all it was. The people around me knew what I meant when I said it. It’s ridiculous to think there’s a deadline because there wasn’t one, and the Packers weren’t going to cut me. The people that were there knew I wasn’t serious.”

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I guess my question for Packers fans is:

Would you rather Ted Thompson:

A) Spent a large chunk of change on some high-profile FAs in an attempt to win this year and convince Favre to stay at the possible expense of younger players getting experience and future salary cap hell?

or

B) Do what he is doing, which is be frugal, look for value in the draft, maybe even trade down to get some more picks and rebuild the team for a 3-4 year window?

Seems like B is the smarter option to me.

 

[sho nuff]

I guess my question for Packers fans is:

Would you rather Ted Thompson:

A) Spent a large chunk of change on some high-profile FAs in an attempt to win this year and convince Favre to stay at the possible expense of younger players getting experience and future salary cap hell?

or

B) Do what he is doing, which is be frugal, look for value in the draft, maybe even trade down to get some more picks and rebuild the team for a 3-4 year window?

Seems like B is the smarter option to me.

B. I like that he has not gone out and sold the farm to seemingly please a QB who has given us great memories and all...but will be gone soon.I would have liked a few more moves this off-season...I would not have minded Larry Allen coming in...granted as a rental...but to help out the younger guards in learning that position from one of the best.

 

[Ed Suspicious]

I know this is crazy talk, but why can't they sign some higher profile guys with front loaded contracts for the this year while we have loads of cash? Why would that screw their cap situation for the future?

ipedream coming soon:

Or better yet, convince Favre that they are on the three year plan where they will build a defense and a running game and shoot for the superbowl. What would Favre be? 39 when he retired? Get him to commit to a three year run with no more talk of retirement for that span of time.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I guess my question for Packers fans is:

Would you rather Ted Thompson:

A) Spent a large chunk of change on some high-profile FAs in an attempt to win this year and convince Favre to stay at the possible expense of younger players getting experience and future salary cap hell?

or

B) Do what he is doing, which is be frugal, look for value in the draft, maybe even trade down to get some more picks and rebuild the team for a 3-4 year window?

Seems like B is the smarter option to me.

B. I like that he has not gone out and sold the farm to seemingly please a QB who has given us great memories and all...but will be gone soon.I would have liked a few more moves this off-season...I would not have minded Larry Allen coming in...granted as a rental...but to help out the younger guards in learning that position from one of the best.

Thanks for the reply. I could have put a middle option in there, which is probably what most fans would like. But I would think most fans would rather error on the side of option B than option A.

 

[Doggler]

When people talk of all these big-name FA's that Thompson could've signed, who exactly are they talking about?

They missed out on Allen. Thompson said himself he wasn't sold on some of the other guards. They weren't able to get as creative as Minnesota did to sign Hutchinson.

Arrington? Julian Peterson? Edgerrin James?

There was and still are big holes on the interior of the line, but it's not like there were hundreds of viable options.

Woodson would still be a nice addition, and with a guy like Hawk likely coming in, the only glaring areas of need are between Tauscher and Clifton. Pick 2.05 could likely do as well as any of the non-1st tier FAs out there, and there will be other stopgaps available all the way through pre-season.

Furthermore, the 2005 Packers weren't nearly as bad as their record suggested. Most 4-12 teams aren't as bad as their record suggests.

Just look at 2004 and 2005.

Tampa Bay went from 5-11 to 11-5

The Bears went from 5-11 to 11-5

The Dolphins went from 4-12 to 9-7

The Redskins went from 6-10 to 10-6

The Giants went from 6-10 to 11-5

The Pack will be playing a last-place schedule, will have some key players back from injury, and odds are they will get more breaks than they did in 2005. While they could regress and again go 4-12, it is quite possible for them to turn it around and go 10-6 or better...granted 8-8, 7-9 is the safest bet.

The comparisons between Marino and Favre IMO are unfair. Favre wasn't terrible in 2005 because he was getting old, he was terrible because he's always terrible when put in positions where he has llittle supporting cast. Look at 2000 with Ray Rhodes!

 

[Doggler]

I guess my question for Packers fans is:

Would you rather Ted Thompson:

A) Spent a large chunk of change on some high-profile FAs in an attempt to win this year and convince Favre to stay at the possible expense of younger players getting experience and future salary cap hell?

or

B) Do what he is doing, which is be frugal, look for value in the draft, maybe even trade down to get some more picks and rebuild the team for a 3-4 year window?

Seems like B is the smarter option to me.

Option C, like you said, something closer to B than A. And this might be out of line with mainline Cheesehead thinking, but I'd like Favre back for one more year no matter what the consquences. Rodgers needs another year of clipboard-holding to increase his slim chances of succeeding. And Favre has earned the right to play it out on his terms IMO - if he wants to stay until he's 40 he can be my guest, he won us a championship and everything past that is gravy.