Favre Thread - Traded to Jets

[gary]

If you can't believe a 38 year old crying man, who can you believe?

I wouldn't give him what he wants just because he's pissed me off with this same crap every year. He wants to act like a small child; treat him like one. Make an example and move on.

But he's not going to do that so just move on with AR.

 

[GuerillaBlack]

It's payback to Brett for holding them hostage all of those years .

 

[gary]

It's payback to Brett for holding them hostage all of those years .

How ever you wish to think of it as but it's just hurting both sides and just keeps going and going and does not help either side at all. Agree?

 

[Texecutioner]

I'm so sick of all of this BS give Brett what he wants and release him and let the Packers move on and sadden their very own fans with AR if that is what they want to do and then this will all be over. The Packers wouldn't have to deal with Brett ever again. That is all. Isn't that what GB wants not to have to deal with Brett ever again? Anyone agree with me?

Yeah I do Gary. It seems that the Packers want to have it both ways. They want to tell Brett that they are moving on and are okay with having Rogers, but then again they don't want to see Brett lighting up the score board anywhere else, and say to themselves that they made a mistake by letting him go. They also don't want to have to face Brett if he goes to the Vikings. To me, it seems like they are being just as indecisive as Brett has been now.

Make up your mind GB. Either let him come back and help you guys get to another SB, or let him go to another team and GB and Brett can both move on and go their separate ways.

 

[gary]

Yeah I do Gary. It seems that the Packers want to have it both ways. They want to tell Brett that they are moving on and are okay with having Rogers, but then again they don't want to see Brett lighting up the score board anywhere else, and say to themselves that they made a mistake by letting him go. They also don't want to have to face Brett if he goes to the Vikings. To me, it seems like they are being just as indecisive as Brett has been now.

Make up your mind GB. Either let him come back and help you guys get to another SB, or let him go to another team and GB and Brett can both move on and go their separate ways.

Agree. People blame Brett and make him out to be the bad guy here and I do as well for him being a jerk about this whole thing but GB is just as much to blame here as well IMO.

 

[GuerillaBlack]

I don't think GB can have as much blame as Brett. Seriously, with the amount of times Brett has flip-flopped on them and held them out until training camp, and I think even on into training camp.

Watch once he gets released, he says he wants to retire again.

 

[GP]

And to the extent we've had this discussion regarding Schaub and Rosenfels (and BTW, I seem to remember a few more Rosenfels supporters than you do), I still don't see where that warrants the shot at the Texans/fans you took for this unrelated story.

Oh, boo-hoo. Seriously now.

You act like I am some sort of secret, underground mole trying to kill your beloved team. And you're the protector of all things Houston Texans.

Quit trying to paint me as a traitor and scoundrel. I have my opinions, and I don't see anything on this board every reaching a total consensus on each topic that's discussed. Hell, even STATS are debated and given their own spin by EACH poster who thinks differently on what matters, doesn't matter, and how the stat is to be "interpreted."

Either ignore me, if I'm that much of a pain to you, or just move on.

I agree that it's fun to watch the Favre/Packers drama. And I happen to think that the best justice for the game itself is if he isn't allowed to have his way. In the end, when he looks back on it, he'll be glad he didn't come back. He needs to be saved from himself.

 

[gary]

I don't think GB can have as much blame as Brett. Seriously, with the amount of times Brett has flip-flopped on them and held them out until training camp, and I think even on into training camp.

Watch once he gets released, he says he wants to retire again.

Maybe so and we all should see what happens overtime. Draging it on like this just isn't what either side needs with the season coming up.

 

[ChampionTexan]

Oh, boo-hoo. Seriously now.

You act like I am some sort of secret, underground mole trying to kill your beloved team. And you're the protector of all things Houston Texans.

Quit trying to paint me as a traitor and scoundrel. I have my opinions, and I don't see anything on this board every reaching a total consensus on each topic that's discussed. Hell, even STATS are debated and given their own spin by EACH poster who thinks differently on what matters, doesn't matter, and how the stat is to be "interpreted."

Either ignore me, if I'm that much of a pain to you, or just move on.

I agree that it's fun to watch the Favre/Packers drama. And I happen to think that the best justice for the game itself is if he isn't allowed to have his way. In the end, when he looks back on it, he'll be glad he didn't come back. He needs to be saved from himself.

There's nobody on this board I have on ignore, and you're not going to be the first. Just like the Favre thing, a board of everyone saying the same thing would get old in about 10 seconds. You're entitled to your opinion no question. I just thing it's kind of telling that on a thread that in no way shape or form had anything to do with the Texans (beyond the simple fact that they are a member of the NFL), you chose to say that if it happened to us, we'd handle it completely wrong. Then again, if all you can do is hammer, pretty much everything's going to look like a nail to you.

 

[GP]

Supposedly that he was salvageable. I am by no means saying Kubiak can't make mistakes, just that there is no reason to believe he hasn't sat through every practice to date and come to the conclusion Schaub gives them the best chance on Sunday.

Kubiak endorses Schaub because Kubiak is old school. He's a former QB himself, and it appears that Kubiak is of the belief that you name a guy "the man" and you move on. But that, IMO, does not preclude Kubiak from (at times) having some deep thought on whether or not Schaub is going to absolutely make it or not. I think he desires for Schaub to make it stick, but Kubiak also knows he's the HC and that Schaub and Schaub alone has to solidify his role as the starting QB.

I am sure there were plenty of times last season, especially when Sage helped us beat the Broncos on national TV, that Kubiak thought he had it pretty good to be in this sort of shape after just recently having David Carr as the face of the offense. When you throw your backup out there, and he wins 3 or 4 games, I think you have to be happy either way.

I know you dislike my stance on this, but I still maintain that Schaub is in no way a cinch to remain the starter. Hell, if anything else...it's due to Schaub's injuries. He was out for a long time, it was a shoulder, and he's going to get hit again and landed upon at some point in the future. I don't like the odds.

 

[GP]

There's nobody on this board I have on ignore, and you're not going to be the first. Just like the Favre thing, a board of everyone saying the same thing would get old in about 10 seconds. You're entitled to your opinion no question. I just thing it's kind of telling that on a thread that in no way shape or form had anything to do with the Texans (beyond the simple fact that they are a member of the NFL), you chose to say that if it happened to us, we'd handle it completely wrong. Then again, if all you can do is hammer, pretty much everything's going to look like a nail to you.

I brought up what gary said to make a point: Why isn't anybody replying to gary and saying "No, you have to name the QB for their to be unity..."?

This is not un-related. It's a way of me showing people that the "Name Your QB And By Golly He's The Anointed One" argument is not a good one.

Am I wrong when I say "If Brett Favre came here, Schaub would be old news and everybody would want Brett to be the starter"? I just gotta' know. Because the argument in the Sage-Schaub thread, in favor of Schaub as starter, is that you gotta' name your QB and let him be the guy. That was probably one of THE biggest pro-Schaub points that was made by multiple people. It's intent is to shut down the whole conversation before it even gets started.

So I just wondered why nobody took the time to reply to what gary said, by in essence saying "Well, just like here in Houston...you gotta' name your starter for the health of the locker room..."

No, if Brett were here tomorrow...there'd be 1,000 posts on the Brett Is A Texan! thread and they'd all be drooling over getting the champ the ball. He carries that sort of weight. Well, what happened to Schaub being named the starter and getting the ball? Schaub be expected to move over.

But neither Schaub, nor Sage, carry that sort of weight. Yet we can't even discuss, on this board, the possibility of there being a QB competition between them. The minute someone mentions it, all hell breaks loose and all those in favor of having a wide-open competition at QB are branded as traitors, dummies, and Schaub haters. The end.

Just wondered why nobody gave the standard pat answer to gary's post.

 

[ChampionTexan]

I brought up what gary said to make a point: Why isn't anybody replying to gary and saying "No, you have to name the QB for their to be unity..."?

This is not un-related. It's a way of me showing people that the "Name Your QB And By Golly He's The Anointed One" argument is not a good one.

Am I wrong when I say "If Brett Favre came here, Schaub would be old news and everybody would want Brett to be the starter"? I just gotta' know. Because the argument in the Sage-Schaub thread, in favor of Schaub as starter, is that you gotta' name your QB and let him be the guy. That was probably one of THE biggest pro-Schaub points that was made by multiple people. It's intent is to shut down the whole conversation before it even gets started.

So I just wondered why nobody took the time to reply to what gary said, by in essence saying "Well, just like here in Houston...you gotta' name your starter for the health of the locker room..."

No, if Brett were here tomorrow...there'd be 1,000 posts on the Brett Is A Texan! thread and they'd all be drooling over getting the champ the ball. He carries that sort of weight. Well, what happened to Schaub being named the starter and getting the ball? Schaub be expected to move over.

But neither Schaub, nor Sage, carry that sort of weight. Yet we can't even discuss, on this board, the possibility of there being a QB competition between them. The minute someone mentions it, all hell breaks loose and all those in favor of having a wide-open competition at QB are branded as traitors, dummies, and Schaub haters. The end.

Just wondered why nobody gave the standard pat answer to gary's post.

See, we have a fundamental disagreement that can't be answered. You're saying Schaub's the starter because Kubiak's deemed him so because of some reason other than his objective and honest evaluation of the two QB's (or I think that's what you're saying). I'm saying Schaub's the starter because Kubiak thinks he's better, and if he ever changes his mind about that, Schaub won't be the starter. The fact that he doesn't talk to the media about his QB evaluations doesn't mean their not going on. I can't prove they are, but then again, you can't prove they're not.

I believe Kubiak's made a determination based on two years of first-hand experience with Sage, and one year with Matt (plus pre-acquisition due diligence) that Schaub is a better QB. Do I think he will be oblivious to indications to the contrary over reasonable periods of time - no I don't. Do I think he'll question his ability to evaluate if Schaub has a bad game or two - no I don't. Do I think he'll let anyone outside of his inner circle know if he is thinking of making a switch - no I don't.

Oh yeah - Brett Favre, Brett Favre, Brett Favre (just thought I'd get that in since that's kind of what this thread is about).

 

[gary]

I brought up what gary said to make a point: Why isn't anybody replying to gary and saying "No, you have to name the QB for their to be unity..."?


So I just wondered why nobody took the time to reply to what gary said, by in essence saying "Well, just like here in Houston...you gotta' name your starter for the health of the locker room..."
Just wondered why nobody gave the standard pat answer to gary's post.

Maybe because you are wrong I see players having a battle every year for their starting job and sometimes even QB's and don't tell me that I am wrong because I see this happen all the time so that is not true.

 

[Drew_Smoke]

He's Brett FRICKIN' Favre. He does have carte blanche to do as he pleases. The Pack was on the brink of the Big Dance. I want to win and would want #4driving the bus.

The best thing #12 could have said was just that..."He's Brett FRICKIN' Farve. Whatever he says...."

Anyone see his interviews on FOX? Could've had Moss. Lied about talking to Mooch. I'd wanna stick it to them as well.


If I am Packer fan I am throwing snowballs at the coach until I get run out.

And if he goes to Minn, that first game will cop ratings like the Clots v. Pats did last year.

 

[gary]

There had even been talk at one time that the Texans may have a battle for the starting QB job.

 

[TK_Gamer]

There had even been talk at one time that the Texans may have a battle for the starting QB job.

Only on this board..I could be wrong but I remember 0 national stories giving any weight to the schaub/sage argument. The one story I remember basicly made a joke about the length of the thread that confirmed Schaub as the better QB. Some people can't move on, that's all.

 

[gary]

Did you all hear what former Packer and Hall Of Famer LB had to say on On The Record about Brett tonight?

 

[Kaiser Toro]

Gilbert Brown has got a point about Favre matter

Former Kansas and Packers defensive tackle/human road block Gilbert Brown is scheduled to go into the Packers Hall of Fame this Saturday. He'll be inducted along with Frank Winters, who, by the way, lives here in Kansas City.

The problem is that Winters will be presented at the Hall by none other than Brett Favre.

And according to Green Bay TV station WBAY (hey, isn't that Frank Boal's old station?), Brown is a little concerned that the messy Favre situation could totally distract from what should be a glorious day for Brown and Winters.

"The main thing I want everybody to remember, this is not Brett Favre Day. It's (supposed to be) Frankie Winters Day and Gilbert Brown Day. We don't want to be remembered for (it being the day) that Brett Favre was reinstated back into the Packers or for (the day) he was let go, or whatever it was," Brown said.

My guess is, unless the Packers welcome Favre back this week as the rightful starting quarterback, he won't be presenting anyone at the Hall, not even a close friend like Winters.

 

[gary]

Only on this board..I could be wrong but I remember 0 national stories giving any weight to the schaub/sage argument. The one story I remember basicly made a joke about the length of the thread that confirmed Schaub as the better QB. Some people can't move on, that's all.

Brett and the Packers and Brett are going to have to move on for the sake of both sides that's what I am saying. Agree?

 

[PapaL]

Great now there's two Bretts the Packers have to deal with? Sheesh...

 

[PapaL]

Artilce by Don Banks Link:

This is going to get the Favre apologists' undies in a bunch, but here goes: From my vantage point, Favre, the past two weeks, has come off as just another selfish superstar who wants what he wants, regardless of the consequences to his team or his ex-teammates. Favre's been great for the Packers. But the Packers have also been great to Favre, and he's seeing everything as a one-way street about now. Just the way so many of the great ones eventually do, after they've been built up and lionized and called legendary so often that it becomes part of their name...

But the warm fuzziness of his final glorious season in Green Bay, and his unique relationship with that town, that team and its special fan base has been altered. Perhaps only slightly, but perhaps significantly more than that. Time will ultimately tell, but my gut tells me nobody's going to come out of this one looking like a winner. Not Favre. Not the Packers. And not all those Cheeseheads who desperately wanted to believe Favre and Green Bay were one of those rare NFL marriages built to last...

But I'd like to ask Favre this: Do you think you'd be the kind of teammate you'd want to have if you walked in and yanked the rug out beneath Rodgers at this point, just days before the start of training camp? Isn't that the kind of me-first stunt that a respected team leader like Favre was never afraid to call out a teammate for? Isn't that right, Javon Walker?...

I'm not convinced he gives a rat's behind, but my sense is that popular opinion is starting to shift away from Favre's position in this stand-off, even as beloved and iconic a figure as he is. That movement to rally fan support for Favre in Wisconsin this week hasn't exactly generated overwhelming response. Less than 200 folks gathered in Green Bay on Sunday, and a Monday rally in the Milwaukee suburbs drew 30 people, according to media reports.

 

[Mr teX]

The GB front office is doing what's best for the team in the long run; what brett wants at this point cannot enter into the picture. I keep hearing people say "well if they don't want him to be their starter, why don't they just release him.." or "he deserves that much.." . Frankly, he deserves nothing after the way he's been acting.

& there is nothing wrong with GB not wanting to get something back in return for moving on from Favre. I guarantee u that if any other team fielded a good offer for him, that deal would be done. Again.... doing what's best for the organization, not letting father time Favre dictate how they go about shaping this team up for the future anymore.

He put himself in this position.

 

[gary]

Artilce by Don Banks Link:

This story states that Brett is being a jerk about this and I don't disagree with that at all. But once again, does GB want this to linger into the season?

 

[WWJD]

The GB front office is doing what's best for the team in the long run; what brett wants at this point cannot enter into the picture. I keep hearing people say "well if they don't want him to be their starter, why don't they just release him.." or "he deserves that much.." . Frankly, he deserves nothing after the way he's been acting.

& there is nothing wrong with GB not wanting to get something back in return for moving on from Favre. I guarantee u that if any other team fielded a good offer for him, that deal would be done. Again.... doing what's best for the organization, not letting father time Favre dictate how they go about shaping this team up for the future anymore.

He put himself in this position.

No..when you have great players who have meant so much to your organization you show them some love and respect...this seems to just be the GB front office wanting to make their point and have the final say. Which is their choice.

But Brett deserves more from that team..he's defined that team for a long, long time and whether they like him, hate him, think he's spoiled, whatever they should grant him his release. To me it's real simple. They can move on, he can move on and all is well in Packerland.

Jerry did it with Emmitt. They should do it for Brett.

 

[HOU-TEX]

This story states that Brett is being a jerk about this and I don't disagree with that at all. But once again, does GB want this to linger into the season?

I'd hope not Gary. I would think there could possibly be a locker room separation if it does drag out. There would likely be players thinking Favre got screwed by the Pack and others thinking it's time to move on to the Rodgers era.

But hey, we play them this year so let the diversity begin!

 

[gary]

No..when you have great players who have meant so much to your organization you show them some love and respect...this seems to just be the GB front office wanting to make their point and have the final say. Which is their choice.

But Brett deserves more from that team..he's defined that team for a long, long time and whether they like him, hate him, think he's spoiled, whatever they should grant him his release. To me it's real simple. They can move on, he can move on and all is well in Packerland.

Jerry did it with Emmitt. They should do it for Brett.

Agree.

 

[gary]

I'd hope not Gary. I would think there could possibly be a locker room separation if it does drag out. There would likely be players thinking Favre got screwed by the Pack and others thinking it's time to move on to the Rodgers era.

See so it will hurt the whole Org. in the long run. That is my point here.

 

[Mr teX]

No..when you have great players who have meant so much to your organization you show them some love and respect...this seems to just be the GB front office wanting to make their point and have the final say. Which is their choice.

But Brett deserves more from that team..he's defined that team for a long, long time and whether they like him, hate him, think he's spoiled, whatever they should grant him his release. To me it's real simple. They can move on, he can move on and all is well in Packerland.

Jerry did it with Emmitt. They should do it for Brett.

Again, there is nothing wrong with GB trying to get whatever they can for moving on from favre. Teams do it all the time with other players....even legends. Releasing him is not their only option of moving on from favre, it's his only good option of moving away from them so that he gets everything he wants. (starting job, playing for a contender etc..)

This would be him again dictating to them what he wants, even though its not in the organizations best interest now, or the future. Besides, if it's just as simple as him wanting to play football again, why hasn't he filed his reinstatement papers yet & put the ball in back in GB's court? What does he fear that he hasn't done this yet? He's not entitled to play for a contending team, and as i've said before, if the right deal came along, they trade him in a heartbeat to be done with this whole fiasco........that is if they are truly committed to moving on without him.

You keep saying "jerry did it for emmitt..", but Emmitt didn't yo-yo the cowboys franchise for 3 years about whether or not he wanted to retire.

 

[gary]

Again, there is nothing wrong with GB trying to get whatever they can for moving on from favre. Teams do it all the time with other players....even legends. Releasing him is not their only option of moving on from favre, it's his only good option of moving away from them so that he gets everything he wants. (starting job, playing for a contender etc..)

This would be him again dictating to them what he wants, even though its not in the organizations best interest now, or the future. Besides, if it's just as simple as him wanting to play football again, why hasn't he filed his reinstatement papers yet & put the ball in back in GB's court? What does he fear that he hasn't done this yet? He's not entitled to play for a contending team, and as i've said before, if the right deal came along, they trade him in a heartbeat to be done with this whole fiasco........that is if they are truly committed to moving on without him.

You keep saying "jerry did it for emmitt..", but Emmitt didn't yo-yo the cowboys franchise for 3 years about whether or not he wanted to retire.

Even though Emit did not screw them around they still released him. Didn't they? So that does not really matter. They could sure as hell do it for Brett.

 

[WWJD]

And the ball is back in my court....

Well like I said this could be very easily settled because it's obvious Brett won't come to the Packers as the backup. Nor should he.

Release him, let him go. They move on with Aaron. Brett gets what he wants. Problem solved.

Obviously I KNOW they don't have to do that and they said they won't.

The reason I bring up Jerry is because he did the right thing and let Emmitt go. Actually there were some hard feelings there because Emmitt was insistent that he hadn't lost anything, the Cowboys felt he had, etc.

But Jerry DID the right thing and out of respect for Emmitt he released him. Emmitt did his time in AZ and retired as a Cowboy. What could have been a nasty situation such as this with Brett turned out not to be because they let a guy go with some respect for what he had done for the organization.

Sure Emmitt's case is different than Brett's but the solution should be the same.

I watched Brett's interview and he said sure he had thought about uprooting his family and moving to another team.

It's obvious the Packers don't want him.

 

[gary]

And the ball is back in my court....

Well like I said this could be very easily settled because it's obvious Brett won't come to the Packers as the backup. Nor should he.

Release him, let him go. They move on with Aaron. Brett gets what he wants. Problem solved.

Obviously I KNOW they don't have to do that and they said they won't.

The reason I bring up Jerry is because he did the right thing and let Emmitt go. Actually there were some hard feelings there because Emmitt was insistent that he hadn't lost anything, the Cowboys felt he had, etc.

But Jerry DID the right thing and out of respect for Emmitt he released him. Emmitt did his time in AZ and retired as a Cowboy. What could have been a nasty situation such as this with Brett turned out not to be because they let a guy go with some respect for what he had done for the organization.

Sure Emmitt's case is different than Brett's but the solution should be the same.

I watched Brett's interview and he said sure he had thought about uprooting his family and moving to another team.

It's obvious the Packers don't want him.

Jerry did not just release Emitt out of respect for the organization it had to be a huge monkey off of their backs.

 

[hobie]

I am not sure how the Emmitt/Cowboys thing ended, don't really care, but I think that Jerry and the coaching staff realized that his best days were over and that he finally got the record with the Star on his helmet, and that it was not in the best interest, both for financial reason and for the team. He lost a few steps, and the team let him go.
Now the thing with BF, he still has the ability to take games over, and well if I am the Packers, and I have BF signed, well regardless, he is under contract. Retire or deal with the fact you will be #2. Now if a good trade comes along so I can build my team for the future, sure, we'll let ya go.
Gary, that was a good point you brought up, they could do that for BF, but when he still has game left, you not only lose a solid QB, but to get nothing in return, well then you sell the team short on that. They both owe each other, and well, the end result is...................

 

[gary]

I am not sure how the Emmitt/Cowboys thing ended, don't really care, but I think that Jerry and the coaching staff realized that his best days were over and that he finally got the record with the Star on his helmet, and that it was not in the best interest, both for financial reason and for the team. He lost a few steps, and the team let him go.
Now the thing with BF, he still has the ability to take games over, and well if I am the Packers, and I have BF signed, well regardless, he is under contract. Retire or deal with the fact you will be #2. Now if a good trade comes along so I can build my team for the future, sure, we'll let ya go.
Gary, that was a good point you brought up, they could do that for BF, but when he still has game left, you not only lose a solid QB, but to get nothing in return, well then you sell the team short on that. They both owe each other, and well, the end result is...................

If he still has game why not play him?

 

[hobie]

If he still has game why not play him?

As we are finding out, I guess GB wants to move on..........only they really know for sure .

 

[gary]

As we are finding out, I guess GB wants to move on..........only they really know for sure .

Release him. I am sorry but I stand by my word.

 

[Mr teX]

If he still has game why not play him?

Yeah they still released emmitt, but part of the reason the organization is treating favre the way they are is b/c of his antics the last 3 years. Had he not done that, we might not even be debating this. Even so, why should the organization cave in once again for the sake of his demands when they've done that for him 3 years already? When is enough enough?

the packers are thinking about the future in both instances regardless of how this plays out; favre is just thinking season to season & unfortunately for him, franchises don't operate that way.


The reality of it is Hobie is right, they both owe each other & they both could still play this better to where it works out best for both parties. but this whole notion that Favre has no ulterior motive, & he should be given leeway b/c of what he's done is weak imo. When does he start to think about the packers is the question that he needs to answer for them; he hasn't answered that question yet.

 

[Polo]

I don't fault the Pack one bit...

It's business...Screw happy feelings...

Eat or be eaten...

 

[gary]

Yeah they still released emmitt, but part of the reason the organization is treating favre the way they are is b/c of his antics the last 3 years. Had he not done that, we might not even be debating this. Even so, why should the organization cave in once again for the sake of his demands when they've done that for him 3 years already? When is enough enough?

the packers are thinking about the future in both instances regardless of how this plays out; favre is just thinking season to season & unfortunately for him, franchises don't operate that way.


The reality of it is Hobie is right, they both owe each other & they both could still play this better to where it works out best for both parties. but this whole notion that Favre has no ulterior motive, & he should be given leeway b/c of what he's done is weak imo. When does he start to think about the packers is the question that he needs to answer for them; he hasn't answered that question yet.

Does this get either side anywhere? No. Anyone agree?

 

[ChampionTexan]

I don't fault the Pack one bit...

It's business...Screw happy feelings...

Eat or be eaten...

Yeah, but if Brett Favre decides to go scorched earth on this, who's going to get eaten?

The following is from an interview with Willie Davis - Packer HOF Defensive End:

"It is a bit of sadness," Davis said this week in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "And it's a bit of sadness because I know how much of a burden this places on everybody."

But he hasn't quite seen anything quite like this.

"It's not only a surprise to me," Davis said. "I cannot believe the magnitude of this thing."

Now Davis' biggest hope is that the situation doesn't devolve into some sort of training-camp showdown between Favre and his heir apparent, Aaron Rodgers. As far as Davis is concerned, such a confrontation could only harm the team.

"I cannot see how it wouldn't," Davis said. "Plus, I think it's a decision that would split the club into several pieces. Some would be in Brett's camp, some in Aaron's camp. That's the quickest way to start getting on a losing path."

I said before, it's a giant game of chicken with the Packers hoping Brett blinks before his legacy is screwed up beyond repair, and Brett hoping the Packers blink before their season gets torched.

 

[Mr teX]

Does this get either side anywhere? No. Anyone agree?

If you look at it superficially........no. but if you look at it for what it is...

lets see, it gets him no where regardless of what he/the pack decide to do. He can't afford to sit out a year, & ultimately his playing days are numbered.

On the other hand, If the packers are indeed right about AR, then it shows they made the right decision to push favre to the side & continue on with a winning team. Hell even if they are wrong, they still have brohm behind rodgers so they effectively have at least 2 years before this may come back to bite them.

They are taking their shot & they've got at least a 50% chance of coming out of this ok......those are pretty good odds.

 

[gary]

Yeah, but if Brett Favre decides to go scorched earth on this, who's going to get eaten?

The following is from an interview with Willie Davis - Packer HOF Defensive End:


I said before, it's a giant game of chicken with the Packers hoping Brett blinks before his legacy is screwed up beyond repair, and Brett hoping the Packers blink before their season gets torched.

Davis is thinking the samething that I am.

 

[Mr teX]

Yeah, but if Brett Favre decides to go scorched earth on this, who's going to get eaten?

The following is from an interview with Willie Davis - Packer HOF Defensive End:


I said before, it's a giant game of chicken with the Packers hoping Brett blinks before his legacy is screwed up beyond repair, and Brett hoping the Packers blink before their season gets torched.

They were a good overall team last year, top 15 defense, great weapons on offense with an emerging young star at RB... what about that suggests that their season will be a wash if he doesn't play with them this year? I understand the whole distraction thing, but that could go either way. I think you're selling the talent on that team short. Brett's just 1 guy.... & he's no longer that 3-time MVP guy either.

 

[ChampionTexan]

They were a good overall team last year, top 15 defense, great weapons on offense with an emerging young star at RB... what about that suggests that their season will be a wash if he doesn't play with them this year? I understand the whole distraction thing, but that could go either way. I think you're selling the talent on that team short. Brett's just 1 guy.... & he's no longer that 3-time MVP guy either.

I'm saying the season will be a wash if he does play with them this season (as a backup QB). Maybe they'll overcome it, but if you want to look for an example, all you have to do is go back to the 2004 Eagles who went 13-3 and made an appearance in the Super Bowl, and followed that up by going 6-10 in 2005 (coincidentally, the year T.O. said they would be undefeated if Brett Favre were their QB). And if you're going to ask me if I'm comparing Brett Favre to T.O., Yep - right now, I'm not sure there's a big difference.

As to talent overcoming the distraction, All I will say is that in 2006, Seattle became the only team since 2000 to lose the Super Bowl and make the playoffs the next year, and that was only because they went 9-7 in an incredibly crappy division. That's seven talented teams taking nosedives. Maybe it doesn't always happen, but I guess where I'm coming from is if you're Ted Thompson, why do you take that chance - particularly when it's costing you over $12 Million to do so?

 

[Mr teX]

I'm saying the season will be a wash if he does play with them this season (as a backup QB). Maybe they'll overcome it, but if you want to look for an example, all you have to do is go back to the 2004 Eagles who went 13-3 and made an appearance in the Super Bowl, and followed that up by going 6-10 in 2005 (coincidentally, the year T.O. said they would be undefeated if Brett Favre were their QB). And if you're going to ask me if I'm comparing Brett Favre to T.O., Yep - right now, I'm not sure there's a big difference.

As to talent overcoming the distraction, All I will say is that in 2006, Seattle became the only team since 2000 to lose the Super Bowl and make the playoffs the next year, and that was only because they went 9-7 in an incredibly crappy division. That's seven talented teams taking nosedives. Maybe it doesn't always happen, but I guess where I'm coming from is if you're Ted Thompson, why do you take that chance - particularly when it's costing you over $12 Million to do so?

well GB didn't go to the SB last year & their division is garbage too so, but i hear ya.

to answer the bolded i would say the reason he's taking the chance is b/c he's got a very legitimate shot to lock up the toughest position to play in the nfl for another 10 + years - which would be nearly 30 consecutive years when you count Favre's tenure. that's unheard of in this day & age. Off the top of my head, I think the Cowboys with meridith-staubach/morton & maybe the 49ers with montana-young are the only teams to come even remotely close to that. I think that well worth favre's last couple of years.

 

[WWJD]

If you look at it superficially........no. but if you look at it for what it is...

lets see, it gets him no where regardless of what he/the pack decide to do. He can't afford to sit out a year, & ultimately his playing days are numbered.

On the other hand, If the packers are indeed right about AR, then it shows they made the right decision to push favre to the side & continue on with a winning team. Hell even if they are wrong, they still have brohm behind rodgers so they effectively have at least 2 years before this may come back to bite them.

They are taking their shot & they've got at least a 50% chance of coming out of this ok......those are pretty good odds.

He CAN afford to sit out a year..he's in great shape and he's working out.
And he's got tons of money. Age? He'll be like Vinny I guess...well conditioned athlete that can play well into his 40's. I think Brett is capable of that.

 

[gary]

If you look at it superficially........no. but if you look at it for what it is...

lets see, it gets him no where regardless of what he/the pack decide to do. He can't afford to sit out a year, & ultimately his playing days are numbered.

On the other hand, If the packers are indeed right about AR, then it shows they made the right decision to push favre to the side & continue on with a winning team. Hell even if they are wrong, they still have brohm behind rodgers so they effectively have at least 2 years before this may come back to bite them.

They are taking their shot & they've got at least a 50% chance of coming out of this ok......those are pretty good odds.

I still think this may linger into the season and bite GB in the butt.

 

[GuerillaBlack]

How will it bite them in the butt?

 

[gary]

How will it bite them in the butt?

The players may be divided over this or if AR doesn't do well. I'm just saying.

 

[PapaL]

He CAN afford to sit out a year..he's in great shape and he's working out.
And he's got tons of money. Age? He'll be like Vinny I guess...well conditioned athlete that can play well into his 40's. I think Brett is capable of that.

Yeah but do they make helmets big enough to fit his ever growing head?

 

[WWJD]

Yeah but do they make helmets big enough to fit his ever growing head?

He's fighting for what he thinks is right. And I happen to agree with him. I don't sit here and think Brett has an out of control ego. I think he just wants to play! But ya know to each his own....