WSSP Radio reporting Vikings have inquired about Favre (1 Viewer)

[Gopher State]

That didn’t take long.

Minneapolis Star and Tribune

A sports radio station out of Milwaukee, WSSP, is reporting on its website that the Vikings “already have inquired about signing [brett] Favre, pending his release from the Packers.” (Technically, the Vikings would have had to call the Packers because Favre is under contract to the team.)

While Minnesota certainly could have interest in Favre the problem is that there is no indication the Packers are going to grant Favre his wish and release him. That means the only option for Favre to get to the Vikings would be via a trade and Packers General Manager Ted Thompson isn’t about to deal the future Hall of Fame quarterback to an arch-rival in the same division.

All of that being said, there are a couple reasons why Favre might want to end up in Minnesota. He remains very close to Vikings offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell, who served as his quarterbacks coach at one point in Green Bay. Favre also would be stepping into a version of the West Coast offense that is very similar to what the Packers ran under former coach Mike Sherman.

This means if the Vikings could get Favre — and, to repeat, that appears to be a huge long shot — they could plug him into the offense very quickly and the fact he missed all of the offseason workouts wouldn’t be that big of deal.

As a Viking fan, I hope its not true, Favre should just return to Green Bay, we really don't need to pay him for three years.

 

[FF_Guru]

I would be amazingly shocked if the Packers traded Brett to MN...according to the latest post Packers say they will not release him, so it has to be a trade or sit in GB.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8335678?MSNHPHMA

There is no way that Thompson and McCarthy are going to trade Farve to MN and let him stick it to them twice this year. Not to mention the first game of the season is MN @ GB when Farve's number is to be retired. Sure in a media frenzy perfect world this would happen, but GB will not allow it.

Not to mention if Farve went to MN, it would immediately move MN to a top 2 team in the NFC right behind Dallas if not in front of Dallas for argument sake. This means GB will not be winning that division and the only way to make playoffs is to get that WC, which is great. But GB's homefield advantage is a strong asset to have in the playoffs. She NY played them well last year, but not many teams survive in those temps.

Long story short...Farve to MN is a lot of wishful thinking. IMO.

 

[Andy Herron]

If, in fact, this situation does come to a trade situation, little Danny Snyder will be throwing everything he's got at the Packers for him. At least whatever it would take to outbid others. The Redskins are known for trading away their draft picks.

 

[ScottyFargo]

I would be amazingly shocked if the Packers traded Brett to MN...according to the latest post Packers say they will not release him, so it has to be a trade or sit in GB.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8335678?MSNHPHMA

There is no way that Thompson and McCarthy are going to trade Farve to MN and let him stick it to them twice this year. Not to mention the first game of the season is MN @ GB when Farve's number is to be retired. Sure in a media frenzy perfect world this would happen, but GB will not allow it.

Not to mention if Farve went to MN, it would immediately move MN to a top 2 team in the NFC right behind Dallas if not in front of Dallas for argument sake. This means GB will not be winning that division and the only way to make playoffs is to get that WC, which is great. But GB's homefield advantage is a strong asset to have in the playoffs. She NY played them well last year, but not many teams survive in those temps.

Long story short...Farve to MN is a lot of wishful thinking. IMO.

The only reason they inquired about him was in case he does somehow get released. They know as well as anyone that GB would not trade them to a rival.

 

[pollardsvision]

if the packers are committed to ensure favre doesn't resurface in the nfc north, then thompson needs to grow a pair.

thompson obviously thinks favre is washed up. does he think this team, that he's geniusly crafted can't compete against a team with a washed up QB.

not playing a QB that terrifies you to play against is wrong on so many levels.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

 

[ScottyFargo]

if the packers are committed to ensure favre doesn't resurface in the nfc north, then thompson needs to grow a pair. thompson obviously thinks favre is washed up. does he think this team, that he's geniusly crafted can't compete against a team with a washed up QB.not playing a QB that terrifies you to play against is wrong on so many levels.

While I agree with you that it's against the spirit of competition, they don't pay him to be fair. They pay him to win, and having Brett Favre on the Vikings (and the Bears, given how they swept the pack last year with a QB carousel) makes it that much harder for them to win the division and get into the playoffs.I think part of sitting on Favre would be spite and the other part tactical prevention of losses.

 

[FF_Guru]

I would be amazingly shocked if the Packers traded Brett to MN...according to the latest post Packers say they will not release him, so it has to be a trade or sit in GB.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8335678?MSNHPHMA

There is no way that Thompson and McCarthy are going to trade Farve to MN and let him stick it to them twice this year. Not to mention the first game of the season is MN @ GB when Farve's number is to be retired. Sure in a media frenzy perfect world this would happen, but GB will not allow it.

Not to mention if Farve went to MN, it would immediately move MN to a top 2 team in the NFC right behind Dallas if not in front of Dallas for argument sake. This means GB will not be winning that division and the only way to make playoffs is to get that WC, which is great. But GB's homefield advantage is a strong asset to have in the playoffs. She NY played them well last year, but not many teams survive in those temps.

Long story short...Farve to MN is a lot of wishful thinking. IMO.

The only reason they inquired about him was in case he does somehow get released. They know as well as anyone that GB would not trade them to a rival.

Well if that was MN thinking, why would they even bother. GB knows if they release him, they know where he is going. Give me another team that is Super Bowl ready and needs a QB? There isn't one out there that has the tools that MN has. Strong DEF and a strong running game is the "basic" formula for a championship team. And MN is lacking at the QB and WR spot. I don't think there is any doubt, that if Brett is released he would go to MN. Which is best chance for him to win a SB.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

exactly. plus that's 5-6 extra interceptions for the packers defense over 2 games

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contender

Vikings with T Jackson = 8-8

 

[FF_Guru]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

exactly. plus that's 5-6 extra interceptions for the packers defense over 2 games

Sweet, they can watch MIN/NE in the Super Bowl...but pat themselves on the back because they have 5 more INTs notched in their belts.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

It would be fun to see Favre and Sharper reunited. They care so deeply for one another.

 

[T Bell]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contenderVikings with T Jackson = 8-8

I'm going to if Favre leads the Vikings to their first Super Bowl title.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contenderVikings with T Jackson = 8-8

I'm going to if Favre leads the Vikings to their first Super Bowl title.

More likely he would lead them to their 5th Super Bowl loss. The Vikings will always be losers.

 

[T Bell]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contender

Vikings with T Jackson = 8-8

I'm going to if Favre leads the Vikings to their first Super Bowl title.

More likely he would lead them to their 5th Super Bowl loss. The Vikings will always be losers.

It wasn't too long ago that people said this about the Patriots and the Bucs. Things change in the NFL. Don't even pretend that this isn't a nightmare scenario for the Packers fans.

 

[ScottyFargo]

I would be amazingly shocked if the Packers traded Brett to MN...according to the latest post Packers say they will not release him, so it has to be a trade or sit in GB.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8335678?MSNHPHMA

There is no way that Thompson and McCarthy are going to trade Farve to MN and let him stick it to them twice this year. Not to mention the first game of the season is MN @ GB when Farve's number is to be retired. Sure in a media frenzy perfect world this would happen, but GB will not allow it.

Not to mention if Farve went to MN, it would immediately move MN to a top 2 team in the NFC right behind Dallas if not in front of Dallas for argument sake. This means GB will not be winning that division and the only way to make playoffs is to get that WC, which is great. But GB's homefield advantage is a strong asset to have in the playoffs. She NY played them well last year, but not many teams survive in those temps.

Long story short...Farve to MN is a lot of wishful thinking. IMO.

The only reason they inquired about him was in case he does somehow get released. They know as well as anyone that GB would not trade them to a rival.

Well if that was MN thinking, why would they even bother. GB knows if they release him, they know where he is going. Give me another team that is Super Bowl ready and needs a QB? There isn't one out there that has the tools that MN has. Strong DEF and a strong running game is the "basic" formula for a championship team. And MN is lacking at the QB and WR spot. I don't think there is any doubt, that if Brett is released he would go to MN. Which is best chance for him to win a SB.

What I took from the roto blurb about Minnesota inquiring about Favre in case of his release was that they were asking his agent about him. Probably to guage his interest, get preliminary figures for what he might cost. I don't disagree that Favre makes sense on the Vikings, I just don't think Green Bay trades their star QB to the up and coming divisional rival just to be nice to Favre.

 

[T Bell]

Given the (official) retirement, can other teams now talk directly with Favre, or do they still need the Packers' permission as with any situation where a team still has his rights?

 

[ScottyFargo]

Given the (official) retirement, can other teams now talk directly with Favre, or do they still need the Packers' permission as with any situation where a team still has his rights?

As it stood, the Packers position was Brett had to ask to be reinstated, and then he'd be again under contract with them. It's kind of odd that a team can cut a player at any time in their contract, and yet players can't just pay back bonuses or fees to do the same.

 

[T Bell]

Given the (official) retirement, can other teams now talk directly with Favre, or do they still need the Packers' permission as with any situation where a team still has his rights?

As it stood, the Packers position was Brett had to ask to be reinstated, and then he'd be again under contract with them. It's kind of odd that a team can cut a player at any time in their contract, and yet players can't just pay back bonuses or fees to do the same.

Not really. Could you imagine the chaos that would result from any player at any time simply opting to repay a prorated share of his bonus to become a FA? The teams need the guarantee of a binding contract more than the player does - the player benefits from being guaranteed the bonus, even if the team cuts him. Seems pretty balanced.

 

[T Bell]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

This is a nice sentiment and one that I can get behind, but in reality Thompson is signing his own pink slip as a Packers GM if such a move even remotely worked to the Vikings' benefit and the Packers' detriment. For example, it's not hard to imagine the local talk radio and message board grumblings if Rogers came in and sucked or got injured, and Packers fans had to watch their otherwise good, young team go 6-10 while the Favre-led Vikings went 11-5 and won the division or something. I can guarantee that there wouldn't be many people speaking fondly of the 2nd round pick - or whatever - that they got in trade from the Vikings, under such circumstances.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Given the (official) retirement, can other teams now talk directly with Favre, or do they still need the Packers' permission as with any situation where a team still has his rights?

As it stood, the Packers position was Brett had to ask to be reinstated, and then he'd be again under contract with them. It's kind of odd that a team can cut a player at any time in their contract, and yet players can't just pay back bonuses or fees to do the same.

Not really. Could you imagine the chaos that would result from any player at any time simply opting to repay a prorated share of his bonus to become a FA? The teams need the guarantee of a binding contract more than the player does - the player benefits from being guaranteed the bonus, even if the team cuts him. Seems pretty balanced.

Yeah it's not like the players starve after getting cut as they are compensated, but I was just considering how most of the time when a team cuts a player it's because it's bad for them to keep them. (Underperforming, legal troubles). When the situation is reversed the player has to stay in the bad relationship. They get the money, but sometimes that's not always what is most important to them.The Packers are totally trying to curb Brett's diva-ness by playing by the rules.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

exactly. plus that's 5-6 extra interceptions for the packers defense over 2 games

Sweet, they can watch MIN/NE in the Super Bowl...but pat themselves on the back because they have 5 more INTs notched in their belts.

yeah, INT machines often lead their teams to the SB.

 

[Donnybrook]

If anything, sources say, the team would be prepared to welcome Favre back as a backup to quarterback Aaron Rodgers.

If Packers did this, how long would it take until Favre re-retires?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

This is a nice sentiment and one that I can get behind, but in reality Thompson is signing his own pink slip as a Packers GM if such a move even remotely worked to the Vikings' benefit and the Packers' detriment. For example, it's not hard to imagine the local talk radio and message board grumblings if Rogers came in and sucked or got injured, and Packers fans had to watch their otherwise good, young team go 6-10 while the Favre-led Vikings went 11-5 and won the division or something. I can guarantee that there wouldn't be many people speaking fondly of the 2nd round pick - or whatever - that they got in trade from the Vikings, under such circumstances.

If the Packers opt for Rogers they are opting for a building year. What the Vikings do in that year is not really the point. I would be happy to see Favre do well there for a year, maybe two, at which time the young Packers, replete with draft choice help, should be coming into their own. It's simple, start Favre and make an improbable Superbowl run (they are good but really only about the 4th through 8th best club out there with Favre) or trade him to continue the current successful building program. Packer fans are passionate, but I don't think stupid. Value is value. The Vikings are in a state where they may just trade a lot for a future is now scenario. Were I Thompson i'd explore that regardless of them sharing a division. Who knows, maybe hysteria will allow them to get a John Hadl type of deal. (Well not that good.)

 

[FF_Guru]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

exactly. plus that's 5-6 extra interceptions for the packers defense over 2 games

Sweet, they can watch MIN/NE in the Super Bowl...but pat themselves on the back because they have 5 more INTs notched in their belts.

yeah, INT machines often lead their teams to the SB.

Yeah he hasn't won a championship has he?

 

[Ron_Mexico]

"Dream away Viking fan**,

let your dreams run wild,

for a lifetime of worries might claim you."

Frank Sinatra 1973

** Sinatra didn't actually use the words "Viking fan" in the lyrics, he used the word "child".

 

[ScottyFargo]

If the Packers opt for Rogers they are opting for a building year. What the Vikings do in that year is not really the point. I would be happy to see Favre do well there for a year, maybe two, at which time the young Packers, replete with draft choice help, should be coming into their own. It's simple, start Favre and make an improbable Superbowl run (they are good but really only about the 4th through 8th best club out there with Favre) or trade him to continue the current successful building program.

Packer fans are passionate, but I don't think stupid. Value is value. The Vikings are in a state where they may just trade a lot for a future is now scenario. Were I Thompson i'd explore that regardless of them sharing a division. Who knows, maybe hysteria will allow them to get a John Hadl type of deal. (Well not that good.)

I don't think the Packers so it that way. The team that Rodgers now leads played in the NFC championship. They have to hope he can take them back there. Obviously, the odds are against that because Rodgers isn't Favre...but they aren't just going to scrap this year because Favre retired once already. They are going to bank on Rodgers being good enough to get the job done. They don't have anything else to rebuild they're already the "youngest team in the NFL."

 

[KingEl]

Didn't Favre always have a problem performing well in Minn while with the Packs!! I may be off, but I seem to remember that always being a tough place for him to play?

 

[ScottyFargo]

Didn't Favre always have a problem performing well in Minn while with the Packs!! I may be off, but I seem to remember that always being a tough place for him to play?

That might have something to do with crowd noise (not sure, half the dome is always Packer fans), the fact that Favre's been hit or miss the last few years, and it being a divisional game. Favre's had trouble winning playoff games in Lambeau for a while too, maybe he will do better back in Atlanta / Tampa Bay / wherever.If, big if, he somehow manages to get released and play for the Vikings, it wouldn't be the dome that made him play bad. It'd be his brain. He's all over the place.

 

[T Bell]

If the Packers opt for Rogers they are opting for a building year. What the Vikings do in that year is not really the point. I would be happy to see Favre do well there for a year, maybe two, at which time the young Packers, replete with draft choice help, should be coming into their own. It's simple, start Favre and make an improbable Superbowl run (they are good but really only about the 4th through 8th best club out there with Favre) or trade him to continue the current successful building program.

Packer fans are passionate, but I don't think stupid. Value is value. The Vikings are in a state where they may just trade a lot for a future is now scenario. Were I Thompson i'd explore that regardless of them sharing a division. Who knows, maybe hysteria will allow them to get a John Hadl type of deal. (Well not that good.)

I don't think the Packers so it that way. The team that Rodgers now leads played in the NFC championship. They have to hope he can take them back there. Obviously, the odds are against that because Rodgers isn't Favre...but they aren't just going to scrap this year because Favre retired once already. They are going to bank on Rodgers being good enough to get the job done. They don't have anything else to rebuild they're already the "youngest team in the NFL."

I agree. If it was Brohm, it would be different but Rodgers is not a rookie or second year player. True, he doesn't have regular season experience, but he has every other advantage that comes from three years of preparation and study. Nobody's going to get philosophical on his behalf if he has a 12/18 TD/INT ratio for the year.

The expectation is that he should be able to win with a team that has a lot of good, young talent on both sides of the ball, and that reached the NFC Championship game last year. Rodgers isn't necessarily expected to be a Pro Bowl player or do what Favre did last year, but OTOH the fans expect more from him than a season full of frustration and growing pains at the QB position on the way to a 7-win season or something.

Also, while I agree with DW that Packers fans aren't stupid, when it comes to discussions about Favre whole swaths of Packers fans are as prone to departing from reality as their basis for discussion as anyone. I think we can agree that this is not an ordinary subject matter for Packers fans to discuss.

 

[vikingdave]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contender

Vikings with T Jackson = 8-8 Division winner

fixed

 

[T Bell]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contender

Vikings with T Jackson = 8-8 Division winner

fixed

Why cross out the "8-8"?

 

[Captain Quinoa]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

exactly. plus that's 5-6 extra interceptions for the packers defense over 2 games

Sweet, they can watch MIN/NE in the Super Bowl...but pat themselves on the back because they have 5 more INTs notched in their belts.

yeah, INT machines often lead their teams to the SB.

Yeah he hasn't won a championship has he?

was he an INT machine then? what's he done in the last 10 years in the playoffs?

 

[Sweet Love]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

I, too, agree with this sentiment. If Minny does this, they are taking a short-term stab at the SB (which is fine), but if it does not work out, GB has essentially taken them out of the running unless Minny can somehow recover quickly (i.e. grab a Brees in FA...which is unlikely). You can't go back to Jackson and while I do not think he is the answer, Minny will have to start at ground zero again when it comes to developing a QB. The Vikings are built today to win for a few years, not one, and they are putting their eggs in one basket if they elect to go with Favre.In the end, all that will matter this year is whether the Packers can beat the team that has Favre on it (Minny, Chicago, etc.). That is what should be managements only concern. The chances of trading Favre and having him win a SB in year one, are small.

 

[ScottyFargo]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

I, too, agree with this sentiment. If Minny does this, they are taking a short-term stab at the SB (which is fine), but if it does not work out, GB has essentially taken them out of the running unless Minny can somehow recover quickly (i.e. grab a Brees in FA...which is unlikely). You can't go back to Jackson and while I do not think he is the answer, Minny will have to start at ground zero again when it comes to developing a QB. The Vikings are built today to win for a few years, not one, and they are putting their eggs in one basket if they elect to go with Favre.In the end, all that will matter this year is whether the Packers can beat the team that has Favre on it (Minny, Chicago, etc.). That is what should be managements only concern. The chances of trading Favre and having him win a SB in year one, are small.

They are prepared to let Tarvaris Jackson start again this year. With one more years seasoning, even if he has to ride the bench, I doubt they would fear starting Tarvaris next year since he's not yet frail and old.

 

[Gopher State]

As a long time Viking fan, I recalled when we traded for H. Walker, and later traded for Archie Manning, these deals didn't get us to the superbowl, and neither will Favre.

While Favre would not cost as much (if Packers would even trade him), I would perfer the Vikes stay away from this deal.

While Jackson is not respected/liked on this board, I think he deserves a chance with BB, and a improved Rice at WR, and a D that should be awsome this year.

 

[fatness]

If, in fact, this situation does come to a trade situation, little Danny Snyder will be throwing everything he's got at the Packers for him. At least whatever it would take to outbid others.

No, he won't. They're happy with their QB situation.

The Redskins are known for trading away their draft picks.

They had 9 picks this year.

 

[T Bell]

As a long time Viking fan, I recalled when we traded for H. Walker, and later traded for Archie Manning, these deals didn't get us to the superbowl, and neither will Favre.While Favre would not cost as much (if Packers would even trade him), I would perfer the Vikes stay away from this deal.While Jackson is not respected/liked on this board, I think he deserves a chance with BB, and a improved Rice at WR, and a D that should be awsome this year.

Forgive me, but I just don't see a basis for comparison for the Walker trade (with it's ridiculous price tag) or the Manning trade (when Manning was clearly washed up and done). How could you argue that Favre does not represent, at least for one year, a step up for your team at the QB position? Obviously, we don't know what it would take to land Favre in trade from the Packers (or even if the Packers would do such an in-division trade) but still.

 

[FF_Guru]

I'm a Packer fan and a Favre nutridder. I see no problem with sending him to Minnesota. The Packers need to look after the Packers long term health. If Favre can bring the most trade value in the division so be it. The idea that a team should screw itself so as to avoid strengthening a divison rival never made sense to me. Send him on for a second round pick, wish him well, let him know he will be welcomed back to officially retire a packer, and change his Number retirement ceremony to a Deanna Favre Charity day. Stay classy and it will inure to the long term benefit of the team.

exactly. plus that's 5-6 extra interceptions for the packers defense over 2 games

Sweet, they can watch MIN/NE in the Super Bowl...but pat themselves on the back because they have 5 more INTs notched in their belts.

yeah, INT machines often lead their teams to the SB.

Yeah he hasn't won a championship has he?

was he an INT machine then? what's he done in the last 10 years in the playoffs?

I think he had something like 13-15 INT's that year...very similar to his performance last year which took him to the NFC championship. Either way, if I had to pick a QB for one season Farve is a top 5 QB.

 

[sho nuff]

John Clayton stated about 20 minutes ago on ESPN radio that he spoke to Thompson today and that they had received no offers or contacts about Favre from other teams at this point.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contender

Vikings with T Jackson = 8-8 Division winner

fixed

Dream the impossible dream.

 

[vikingdave]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contender

Vikings with T Jackson = 8-8 Division winner

fixed

Dream the impossible dream.

Explain the impossible please?

 

[the turnip]

"Packer fans are passionate, but I don't think stupid."

Apparently you haven't met many Packer fans.

 

[bcr8f]

If, in fact, this situation does come to a trade situation, little Danny Snyder will be throwing everything he's got at the Packers for him. At least whatever it would take to outbid others. The Redskins are known for trading away their draft picks.

Exactly. It's also a new WCO and comes from Seattle. Favre could ease Campbell in.Minnesota is too controlling to give up a first round pick for Favre(I wouldn't do it for less, maybe 2 first rounders). Tampa is also interested.

 

[bcr8f]

"Packer fans are passionate, but I don't think stupid." Apparently you haven't met many Packer fans.

But Tavaris Jackson is the next McNabb.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

As much as I like the idea of having a big time QB like Favre behind center for the Vikings, I really don't see how it is much different for the Vikings than it is for the Packers.

1. They have a QB that they believe in and think is ready to take a big step.

2. They don't want to help a division rival. If Favre is going to ride the pine, then why would you give the division rival help via a trade, ie. free draft pick(s)?

3. While the Vikings aren't nearly as young as the Packers, they also are not a team designed to make a one year run at the title.

The only way I would see the Vikings making a play for Favre is if he were released.

 

[the turnip]

"Packer fans are passionate, but I don't think stupid." :( Apparently you haven't met many Packer fans.

But Tavaris Jackson is the next McNabb.

Geez, I don't feel that even Tavarius' Mom thinks that he's the next McNabb. Unless it's his penchant for injury you're referring to ?

 

[FunkyPlutos]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contenderVikings with T Jackson = 8-8

Maybe, but before you get too far with the Tarvaris bashing look at these stats:Vikings offense (2007) = 13th in total yards (336.2 yards/game) and 15th in scoring offense (22.8 points/game)Vikings offense in the 12 games that Tarvaris started = 353 yards/game (would put them at 8th in total yards) and 26.9 points/game (would put them at 5th in scoring)They were 8-4 in the games in which Tarvaris started last season. The pass defense was the biggest weakness of this team last season, not their starting QB. They have done a lot to address their biggest weakness, so I think that they should see an increase in wins this season.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contenderVikings with T Jackson = 8-8

Maybe, but before you get too far with the Tarvaris bashing look at these stats:Vikings offense (2007) = 13th in total yards (336.2 yards/game) and 15th in scoring offense (22.8 points/game)Vikings offense in the 12 games that Tarvaris started = 353 yards/game (would put them at 8th in total yards) and 26.9 points/game (would put them at 5th in scoring)They were 8-4 in the games in which Tarvaris started last season. The pass defense was the biggest weakness of this team last season, not their starting QB. They have done a lot to address their biggest weakness, so I think that they should see an increase in wins this season.

While I agree that Pass D was obviously rough, the Vikings had a very low TIME OF POSSESSION for being the #1 rushing team, and that's due to Tarvaris not being able to get things done right. He has a good opportunity to improve this year, but I personally can't sugarcoat his play last year. It was bad. Until he is able to average 200 yards a game passing he'll be making it harder for the Vikings to win.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

Vikings with Favre = Super Bowl contender

Vikings with T Jackson = 8-8

Maybe, but before you get too far with the Tarvaris bashing look at these stats:Vikings offense (2007) = 13th in total yards (336.2 yards/game) and 15th in scoring offense (22.8 points/game)

Vikings offense in the 12 games that Tarvaris started = 353 yards/game (would put them at 8th in total yards) and 26.9 points/game (would put them at 5th in scoring)

They were 8-4 in the games in which Tarvaris started last season. The pass defense was the biggest weakness of this team last season, not their starting QB. They have done a lot to address their biggest weakness, so I think that they should see an increase in wins this season.

While I agree that Pass D was obviously rough, the Vikings had a very low TIME OF POSSESSION for being the #1 rushing team, and that's due to Tarvaris not being able to get things done right. He has a good opportunity to improve this year, but I personally can't sugarcoat his play last year. It was bad. Until he is able to average 200 yards a game passing he'll be making it harder for the Vikings to win.

I agree about the TOP but not sure it is Tarvaris' fault. A BIG reason that it was so low for their number of rushing yards was the number of big plays that Peterson and Taylor had running. They got big chunks of yardage on many of their carries.Edited to add: I'm not saying that I think Tarvaris is a Pro Bowl caliber QB, I just don't think he is as big of a detriment to the team as many do.