Reply With Quote
Me too.
I just hope they don't change their minds.
Last edited by SpursFanFirst; 07-12-2008 at 01:36 PM.
Me too.
Well it's not like he's the only NFL player to ever win three MVPs in a row, win the SB and break every QB record except Tom Brady's ridiculous 50 TD single season record. I bet Brady Quinn doesn't come close to sniffing anything in Favre's trophy case. He's already got no chance at the consecutive games started record after going into his second season as Derek Anderson's personal waterboy.
The Packers are doin' the right thing by stickin' with Rodgers.
It'll be interesting if Favre accepts the backup role, knowing that any up by Aaron Rodgers will entice the fans/media to pressure the Pack to starting him.
The Packers are in a tough position either way.
+1 This was the ABSOLUTE PERFECT response.
GB: You won't hold us hostage, and we won't release you.
Favre hated being a backup, even when he was a fat nobody in ATL. He may try to call their bluff by coming into camp, but he'll never spend the whole season holding a clipboard.
He's gonna end up getting released. Too many major media markets with money to throw at the league. He will be back. jets,bears,vikes,bucs,lions just off the top of my head. Can't say I don't support him.Don't agree with how he went bout it, but I see the league coming up with a solution that benefits all partys involved
Last edited by cant w8 4 2012; 07-12-2008 at 02:43 PM.
For 12 million dollars Farve should relish the role as back up. God I hope he calls the Packers bluff.Pack should just make a deal to have him play in AFL.Thats the end of that. Instead both parties are going to act like ass's. Not good TV either.
He retired fair and square after jerking off the Packers for years about whether he would retire or not. If he wants to come back, he needs to go back to Green Bay and ride the bench for most of the season. The Packers FO needs to sit down with him and Rodgers and say that they are committed to Aaron, but if the Pack is doing worse than 4-1 going into week 6 and they are losing in the 2nd quarter of that game, bring Brett of the bench and see if they do any better with him.
Nah, I figure they wont release him, but they'll trade him to a sucky team.
I would trade brent but not release him
they better be willing to get up picks and whatever green bay wants for himHe's gonna end up getting released. Too many major media markets with money to throw at the league. He will be back. jets,bears,vikes,bucs,lions just off the top of my head. Can't say I don't support him.Don't agree with how he went bout it, but I see the league coming up with a solution that benefits all partys involved
Trade him to the Dolphins. I've lost a lot of respect for Favre the flip flopper.
Call their bluff Brett.
Bringing Favre back as a back up is the absolute worst idea the Green Bay brass could do. They'll have to pay him what 9 million or 12 million dollars(can't remember what he is due this year) AND make him ride the bench? Are you kidding.
And if Favre says "okay, you can pay me to be a back up" he can enjoy all the Packer fans roaring his name at every home game, booing Rodgers and the coaching staff everytime Rodgers makes a mistake, any mistake, inevitable mistakes. There will be fans chanting for him to play in beginning of games aswell. That would kill Rodgers confidence, make McCarthy highly uncomfortable, and Thompson cringe.
Thats what Green Bay gets for forcing to decision on Brett way back in March. Just release him already.
I wouldn't put it past Favre to completely the team in order to get what he's wanted for three years, which is to play for one of Green Bay's division rivals. How dare the team ask him not to leave them hanging for the entire summer a third year in a row! The nerve of some people.
Seriously, it'd serve the Packers fans screaming about loyalty right if the team just released him. They'd quickly realize what a rotten little punk he is when he runs to either Minnesota or Chicago.
Over the last 3 years of spending hundreds of hours watching ESPN, reading sports news, I must of missed that interview where Favre said he wantedto play for a division rival. Guess I missed that one.
If Im a Packer fan, how dare the team NOT want to bring Favre back for a legitamate run at Super Bowl. You are going to win more games with Favre than Rodgers, that's just a simple fact.
Plus it would make for incredible NFL drama if Favre ends up with Minny or Chicago and plays Green Bay and Rodgers. I wouldn't miss those games, thats for sure.
I know alot packer fans
they want brent gone
they know they are not about to win a le
and want to reload with a new quarterback and get that chemistry started between the quarterback and receiver
GREEN BAY, Wis. (AP)—The Packers aren’t about to let Brett Favre become a free agent. And while he’s now free to return to Green Bay for another season, there’s no guarantee he’ll be the Packers’ starting quarterback if he does.
In an interview with The Associated Press Saturday, Packers general manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy said they don’t plan to grant Favre the release he is seeking from his contract and are committed to Aaron Rodgers as their starter.
“We’ve communicated that to Brett, that we have since moved forward,” Thompson said Saturday, in his first public comments since Favre requested to be released this week. “At the same time, we’ve never said that there couldn’t be some role that he might play here. But I would understand his point that he would want to play.”
And if Favre wanted to play for the Packers, he had the chance when he told them a few weeks after his tearful goodbye news conference that he was having second thoughts. With Thompson and McCarthy preparing to board a private plane to fly to Mississippi and seal the deal on a comeback, all Favre had to do was say yes.
He didn’t.
“Ted always wanted Brett back,” McCarthy said. “We always wanted Brett back.”
A message left by the AP with Favre’s agent, Bus Cook, was not immediately returned.
Favre, who led the Packers to a Super Bowl le after the 1996 season, held a tearful news conference to announce his retirement March 6. Favre has made high drama out of his waffling over retirement in the past several offseasons, but it seemed to be for real this time.
Until Favre told Packers offensive line coach James Campen a few weeks later that he was having second thoughts. Campen is a friend of Favre’s who McCarthy said has been miscast as an official intermediary between Favre and the team in some media reports.
After several telephone discussions with Favre led them to believe he wanted to return, Thompson and McCarthy were preparing to go to Mississippi when Favre suddenly called McCarthy.
“He said he appreciated all the planning we were going to do,” McCarthy said. “But he felt that at this point, he had reached a point of closure, to use his words, and he was going to stick with his initial decision.”
Even after Favre’s near-comeback in March, McCarthy and Thompson said they regularly communicated with Favre. Thompson even went to Mississippi to visit Favre in May, and didn’t get the sense Favre was having serious thoughts about playing again as the two had lunch on his back porch.
“He mentioned several things where you could tell there’s always indecisiveness,” Thompson said. “He’s wondering if he made the right decision. I think that’s normal.”
But the tone changed dramatically in June, when Campen said he was getting worried about Favre. McCarthy said he had a phone conversation with Favre on June 20, and the quarterback sent a clear message: “Give me my helmet or give me my release.”
Even then, McCarthy said when he asked Favre if he was ready to make a 100 percent commitment to football—an issue Favre had brought up in his retirement news conference—the answer still was no.
“That always seemed to be the one thing that he had to come to grips with,” McCarthy said.
In this Dec. 21, 2006 file photo, Green Bay Packers quarterback Brett Favre waves to spectators as he leaves the field following the Packers' 9-7 victory over the Minnesota Vikings during an NFL football game in Green Bay, Wis. The Green Bay Packers' general manager and coach don't plan to grant Brett Favre's request for his release. If he does rejoin the team, they told The Associated Press, it won't be as the starting quarterback.
In this Dec. 21, 2006 file pho…
AP - Jul 12, 2:45 pm EDT
Next came a text message exchange between Thompson and Favre on July 4. At the time, Thompson didn’t think it was a big deal that he wrote Favre back saying he was traveling and asked if they could talk Monday.
But then Thompson began getting texts from Cook. Sensing rising tension, Thompson and McCarthy agreed to a conference call with Favre and Cook on Tuesday.
Only then, McCarthy said, did Favre say he was 100 percent committed to playing. McCarthy said he doesn’t question Favre’s commitment to football, but said Favre often brought up the issue himself.
“The way he plays the game illustrates the guy is committed,” McCarthy said. “(But) those are his words. That was always his final hurdle that he said he had to get over.”
The hurdle was apparently cleared weeks before the start of training camp.
“Was it convincing? I’d say yes,” McCarthy said. “But that was the first time, July 8, that I’d ever heard him say (he was committed). And he continually, from (June) 21 to July 8, told James Campen that he was not going to play. So that’s a pretty important piece of the puzzle.”
In this Nov. 11, 2007 file photo, Green Bay Packers head coach Mike McCarthy, right, smiles with Brett Favre (4) during the second half of an NFL football game Sunday, Nov. 11, 2007, in Green Bay, Wis. Packers coach Mike McCarthy was grilled about rumors of a Brett Favre comeback Wednesday, july 9, 2008, and not by the media, but by kids at the Boys & Girls Club of Green Bay.
In this Nov. 11, 2007 file pho…
AP - Jul 9, 4:07 pm EDT
Cook then sent the Packers a letter officially asking for Favre to be released, which would allow him to sign with any NFL team.
With Favre not being offered a defined role with the Packers if he returns at this point, and the team not inclined to release Favre so he could sign with a division rival, a trade may be the best resolution.
Thompson and McCarthy declined to discuss that possibility, and Thompson said he had not received any inquiries from other teams as of Saturday morning.
Where does that leave the Packers and their beloved three-time MVP?
In a pretty big mess.
“Quite frankly, it’s a little gut-wrenching as an organization to go through it, and certainly for Mike and myself,” Thompson said. “This stuff hurts a lot of people. I mean, it hurts. I’m not talking about physically hurting, but the sensitivity. We understand where the fans are coming from. This is a hot-button issue that surpasses anything I’ve ever gone through.
what a losser
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_yl...e=lgns&print=1
Last edited by ducks; 07-12-2008 at 11:47 PM.
Big Ben, Carson Palmer and Tony Romo comment on Farve...would like to see him play.
http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/...59789&n8pe6c=1
Favre. What an indecisive pussy.
Yeah, you've made it rather clear that the only way you were going to catch it is if he flat out told the world, something the Packers would have appreciated as well.
If you've watched that much ESPN, then you are well aware of the "What are they going to do? Release me?" offseason. If you aren't smart enough to recognize that whole charade for what it was, then I'm afraid all the ESPN in the world isn't going to help you.
You can't be as sports-educated as you claim and say something like that, because they wanted to bring him back. There's hundreds of accounts of it. They asked him. They've done every single thing they can, but once he told them repeatedly that he was done, they had to move on. I suppose you think it's okay to just scrap all the mini camps they've done, tear up all the game planning they've spent the last five months going over and just let Brett come back. They are a legitimate Super Bowl contender as it stands, and that puts them way behind all the other teams. Surely you understand that football teams work 12 months a year, and they simply can't afford to put themselves at such a huge disadvantage of creating a strategy if they don't know who the quarterback is going to be.
Presuming for the moment that the Packers weren't well aware that Favre doesn't actually want to play for them, they could bring him back, which would probably end up alienating Rodgers and a good part of the locker room, have to try to rely on his arm and decision making to win big games and then face the inevitable tearful retirement ceremony once again next winter. Not really worth the headache.
Now, back to reality: since the Packers are well aware they're being played, they are better off calling his bluff and playing dumb and innocent to the press.
Good thing the 49ers didn't listen to the people that said "You're stupid to get rid of Montana; Steve Young isn't going to be any good."
Well then the Packers should just tell their team, their coaches, their current quarterback, and their season ticket holders to suck it because non-Packers fans out in ESPN land want to see more manufactured drama revolving around Brett Favre.
it would be funny if he went to the bears
and a green bay player creamed him and caused him to miss his first game
I hope the Madden curse hits him if he returns.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,2446933.story
Since the AP are a bunch of s, I can't even post the headline, but it's a good read.
I really wouldn'y be the least bit surprised to see that guy here in Baltimore. We have a habit of signing QB's on their last leg when really we have prospects on the roster already who should be starting. Plus I'm not sure how effective Favre would be with those bunch of misfit recievers we have.
So is this the point in our dialog where you throw personal insults at me for having a different opinion huh? Okay.
But I got to call some bull on you. You said Favre wanted to play for division rivals the last three years. I used an obvious exaggeration that I spent hours watching ESPN over the last three years to point out that Favre never said that. If you can provide a link to prove that, I'll accept that I missed that. And yes I am well aware of the last three Packer off seasons and what was said and blah blah blah, but I never heard Favre say he wanted to play for division rivals like you said. I won't take what you think as truth. So that's a lie in my book as long until you can provide information that its not. Lets try to keep this conversation in the realm of reality shall we.
But I wont personally insult you to prove my point as you like to do. I'll thank you for proving my point, which is the Packers should release him.You claim bringing Favre back will throw the team off track, kill strategy, etc. You are making it seem as if bringing Favre back to the offense is going to destroy chemistry, set the team back and be an absolute horrible transition. Surely you'd know it could be a seamless transition to assimilate a 17 year veteran hall of famer to the team he's been with for years, to an offense he already knows. McCarthy hasn't changed his whole offense just for Rodgers, they've been tweaking it a bit to tailor it towards Rodgers strengths. But again you say they will have to "tear up all the game planning they've done during OTAs, not training camp, but OTAs.
Okay then, if you believe that, then all the more reason for the Packers to release Favre don't you think! Since, like you say, it would be disastrous to bring him back.
And I said if I were a Packer fan I would want Favre back. He can still play at a high level and YES the team IS better with him. But I'm not a Packer fan. I'm all for them releasing him even though I think they are better with him as their starting QB. I said in my previous post that bringing Brett back as a back up is a stupid idea.
Oh, And don't make a comparison of Steve Young and Arron Rodgers okay, just don't do that. You have your facts completely mixed up. Those are 2 completely different situations and surely you knew that. You said:
But everyone knew Young was already good. Young had received quite a bit of playing time before he took over for Montana. He started and played well for 10 games in '91, and started all 16 games in '92, becoming a Pro-bowler. It wasn't until before the '93 season that Montana was traded. Two different situations and a bad comparison on your part.
Its obvious you dislike Favre and probably always have, but you just want him to retire because the Packers don't want him back. I say let the man play if he wants to.
Last edited by O-Factor; 07-14-2008 at 11:10 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions