Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The Great Brett Favre Kerfuffle of 2008


  • Please log in to reply
143 replies to this topic

#21 timothy1997

timothy1997

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,640 posts

Posted 14 July 2008 - 06:34 AM

QUOTE (Packer487 @ July 14, 2008 - 01:51AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't necessarily think Rodgers will be a huge dropoff from Favre.


You have got to be kidding. #4 is a surefire hall of famer. He has won a Super Bowl. To me there is no debate that #4 is one of the greatest QBs ever.

ANY qb the packers use after #4 will be a huge dropoff.

#22 Icteria virens

Icteria virens

    3rd Line Checker

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts

Posted 14 July 2008 - 10:06 AM

QUOTE (sjradio @ July 14, 2008 - 04:10AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Don't have a link to this story but there were about 200 fans who were "protesting" outside Lambeau Field chanting phrases like "Bring Back Brett" and "Favre for President"

200??? Seriously. He's the god of football in the teams' history and you can only get 200 fans.

I could get more students at the local high school to protest they hate meatloaf...


actually several local media reports said that "about 100" fans protested.

funny as heck,

#23 Packer487

Packer487

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 838 posts

Posted 14 July 2008 - 10:54 AM

QUOTE (sjradio @ July 14, 2008 - 04:10AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Don't have a link to this story but there were about 200 fans who were "protesting" outside Lambeau Field chanting phrases like "Bring Back Brett" and "Favre for President"

200??? Seriously. He's the god of football in the teams' history and you can only get 200 fans.

I could get more students at the local high school to protest they hate meatloaf...


They didn't publicize it at all really. I read that someone was trying to get a rally together and then never heard anything else about it until there was an article about how it already happened. You aren't going to get people to show up by randomly calling phone numbers in the Green Bay white pages...

QUOTE
You have got to be kidding. #4 is a surefire hall of famer. He has won a Super Bowl. To me there is no debate that #4 is one of the greatest QBs ever.

ANY qb the packers use after #4 will be a huge dropoff.


I think Rodgers is going to be a fine football player and I think it's entirely likely he'd be the best QB in the NFC North this year if he plays. Is he Brett Favre? No. But I also wouldn't go thinking that Green Bay will suddenly become Chicago at the QB position. If he stays healthy. I'm sure there'd be a dropoff, but I also think Green Bay would still be just fine at the QB position as long as Rodgers doesn't get hurt.

Edited by Packer487, 14 July 2008 - 12:23 PM.


#24 SouthernWingsFan

SouthernWingsFan

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 24,609 posts
  • Location:Mandeville, Louisiana (Greater New Orleans area)

Posted 14 July 2008 - 08:23 PM

I thought the same thing with Clemens in/out retirement, I'm saying the same thing with Forseberg trying to come back from injury for the countlessth time, I'm saying the same thing with Favre...

Who am I to tell an individual to just quit his or her career or doing the thing that he/she loves for a living? If Favre thinks he still has gas left in the tank, more power to him if he does come out of retirement and can still work and perform at a level he's comfortable with. It'd be cool to see that happen I think.

In terms with Aaron Rodgers, sure I'd think he'd like to start. It cannot be personal though or he cannot go apes**t on the Packers or Brett Favre if he returns to the Packers. Aaron Rogers has to worry about Aaron Rogers.

For the Packers organization, I understand their latest stance (I am assuming) in saying that Rodgers is the starter. It is business, not personal with an icon. If I were a major part of managment, I'd definitely welcome Favre back, but he has to compete to get his #1 job back, not have it handed to him.

#25 timothy1997

timothy1997

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,640 posts

Posted 14 July 2008 - 09:36 PM

Am I not the only one that thinks #4 and the Packers organization are ruining what SHOULD be a great retirement of a living legend?

I also think that #4 is an attention *****. He likes everyone talking about this. In or Out #4, pick a side. Packers organization, take him back or cut him....do either one. Let him go where he wants to go. He has earned that right.

#26 mannysBETTER3434

mannysBETTER3434

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,868 posts
  • Location:Hudsonville, MI

Posted 14 July 2008 - 10:44 PM

QUOTE (timothy1997 @ July 14, 2008 - 08:36PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Am I not the only one that thinks #4 and the Packers organization are ruining what SHOULD be a great retirement of a living legend?


Thought the exact same thing! If he never plays again most people (except probably GB fans) will remember how he went out instead of the other things he should have been remembered for.

#27 Packer487

Packer487

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 838 posts

Posted 15 July 2008 - 01:27 AM

It must be contagious, because I've flip-flopped a couple of times today:

It's pretty clear whose side I'm on based on my posts on this board. I've worn a Brett Favre jersey the past four days (I have several) and I'm not planning on stopping anytime soon.

Then I read some quotes today in the lead up to the interview about Favre saying he didn't want to be traded because it would "cede control to the Packers" and that he "wouldn't come to Green Bay to backup Aaron Rodgers" and I started to think he was being very unreasonable. That realistically there's no way GB would release him and so he better get used to the idea that they'd trade him--and would likely let him have input into his new location.

Now, having read the transcript of the interview tonight (the situation just makes me sad, and we watch "Saving Grace" anyway, so I figured I didn't need to see it live) I'm back on Brett's side:

I fully believe that the Packers pressured him into making a decision in March and that he did the responsible thing and retired. If he wasn't 100% committed to coming back at that point, there was no way he could tell them he was coming back. If he announced he was coming back and then retired at this point (rather than vice-versa), he would've COMPLETELY screwed the team over. At this point, they're in an uncomfortable situation, but the option is either having Favre-Rodgers-Brohm or Rodgers-Brohm-Flynn. Neither is bad. If Favre announces a comeback and then goes Barry Sanders on us, our QB depth chart looks like this: Aaron Rodgers. Perhaps Rodgers-Flynn.

If Favre was, in fact, told that playing in Green Bay wasn't an option and yet they couldn't envision him playing for another team, the Packers are being even more unreasonable than Favre was when he asked for his outright release. The team should not have any control over a player's desire to continue his career. If they really wanted to, they would have the right to say "You can come back, but we aren't moving you. You'll stay on our team." It would be a low move to pull against a player that has done so much for the organization, but if they really wanted to that's their right as he signed the contract. But you can't say "You can't play here AND we're not moving you." That's crap.

If Mike McCarthy did in fact tell Favre that they would have let him wait until training camp to announce his intentions, then the only thing that has changed is that the team has believed for three months that Aaron Rodgers would be the starting QB. They would have had to approach the draft and free agency as if Favre wasn't coming back. They would have gone through the OTAs under the assumption that Favre wasn't coming back. They would have added some Aaron Rodgers plays to the playbook in case he became the starter. It's absolute BS that they won't take Favre back if it's true that they were willing to wait until training camp for him to make up his mind, and just didn't inform him of that.

I love Brett Favre. People can talk about how "He didn't make this team what it was" all they want to. That is true. Without his line or without Reggie, without Holmgren, maybe they don't accomplish everything they accomplished. He didn't win the Super Bowl by himself. But he did provide some of the greatest sports memories that I have. Memories that I will cherish my entire life. I've got DVD after DVD filled with all of our wins from the last 2 years along with some of the classics over the years that I've been able to find. I even have a couple from that dreadful 4-12 year. The reason I have them is simply so that once Brett Favre is gone, I'll be able to go back and watch him play again. I know the Packers were around for years before Favre came and they'll be around long after he's gone. But for me, it's never going to be the same. I'll still love this team. I'll still cheer my head off for them. I'll still go to games and cherish the moment when I do. But I can pretty much guarantee that I'll never have as much fun watching football as I have had watching Brett Favre. Maybe I'm just an oversentimental fuddy-duddy, but I want another chance to see him in the green and gold. I'm not ready for this era to end. If we were 7-9 last year I could understand wanting to move on, but we were 13-3 and 1 play from the Super Bowl. Favre had one of the best seasons of his career. Why are we so anxious to see the quarterback of the future, when the quarterback of the past and present still wants to play?

I do understand why the Packers would want to move on after Favre flip-flopped in March. What I don't understand is, if they were in fact willing to let him wait until training camp to decide, what has changed? Why not, at the point of the flip-flop, tell him, "Brett, take some more time, and talk to us again when camp gets here"? It's now training camp. The man wants to play. Sure Rodgers would be disappointed, but he's smart enough to know that Favre is a special player and taking Favre back isn't saying anything negative about Rodgers.

I'm sure Favre knows how this is making him look. The JSO had a poll and only like 47% of the fans want to see him back as the QB at this point. That would have been unfathomable in January. He's coming across looking really bad (though I think he helped himself tonight). But is it not understandable that they forced him into a decision and he did the responsible thing, and now wishes he had made the other choice? He's having to swallow an unbelievable amount of pride to come out of retirement after that press conference he had. But the man wants to play. And I don't see how anyone can fault him for that.

I'm sick of seeing the fans turn on him for not doing anything wrong. Could he have handled things better? Sure. He should have spoken well before tonight and not allowed his family, friends, and text messages say it all. Could the organization have handled it better? Absolutely. They could have started by being honest with him--either having the balls to tell him in the first place that they wanted to move on, or given him the time he needed to make a decision he could live with. In the end, I'm inclined to believe what Favre is saying. GMs are notorious liars. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but I'd bet it's closer to Favre's version.

Two of the most cherished figures in the history of the Packers retired and then came back: Reggie White and Vince Lombardi. Were either of them selfish, unreasonable, or tarnishing their legacy? No. The hate that's been spewed for Favre is, to me, completely ridiculous. Yes, he's waffled and the will-he-or-won't-he game is tiresome at best and attention whoring at worst. But it's hard to blame a guy for wanting to play if he thinks he still can...

QUOTE
Thought the exact same thing! If he never plays again most people (except probably GB fans) will remember how he went out instead of the other things he should have been remembered for.


I don't buy that for a second. In the short-term, you're probably right. In the long-term? It's going to be a non-issue. Does anyone actually remember Reggie White's year in Carolina? Did it hurt his legacy whatsoever? Not in my book.

What about Vince Lombardi coaching the Redskins for a year? Honestly, if I hadn't read a biography of him, I don't think I'd know about that one.

Montana as a Chief? Jordan as a Wizard? Did that diminish anything they did with San Fran or Chicago? Nope. And those years definitely don't define their careers.

Do people remember Joe Namath for his guaranteed Super Bowl win or his ill-advised year as a Ram?

Slightly different, but do people remember Bart Starr as one of the great QBs of all-time, or as a pretty awful coach?

These great memories will live on. Even 5, 10 years from now, people really aren't going to care how Favre retired, just that he broke every passing record in the book, won a Super Bowl, and was arguably the most entertaining player of his era.

The only way this possible season with a different team is anything more than an afterthought on his career is if he ends up going to/winning the Super Bowl or wins MVP. If he's merely good, no one will care that much. If he isn't good, they'll say he hung on too long, but it won't be mentioned years from now. Just like it hasn't been with Reggie White or some of those other guys I mentioned....

Edited by Packer487, 15 July 2008 - 01:28 AM.


#28 rage

rage

    Nicklas ~The World's Best~ Lidstrom

  • Silver Booster
  • 3,879 posts
  • Location:Dallas, Texas!

Posted 15 July 2008 - 02:39 AM

Packer487...You really love Brett!!

Green Bay would be stupid to release him. Trade? Yeah, then they won't f*** themselves to much.

Trade him to Philly. Isn't that what he wanted a couple years ago??

Posted Image





#29 timothy1997

timothy1997

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,640 posts

Posted 15 July 2008 - 06:13 AM

comparing #4's retirement to Reggie White's isnt even a fair comparison. #4 is jerking around his retirement more similar to when Barry Sanders shocked everyone and called it a career. There are still people that hate Sanders here in Detroit for what he did. Wonder how long before there are people that begin to just hate #4 and what him to shut up....if they dont have them already.

#30 F.Michael

F.Michael

    Old School Dynamic Duo

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,525 posts
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 15 July 2008 - 09:08 AM

QUOTE (timothy1997 @ July 15, 2008 - 06:13AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
comparing #4's retirement to Reggie White's isnt even a fair comparison. #4 is jerking around his retirement more similar to when Barry Sanders shocked everyone and called it a career. There are still people that hate Sanders here in Detroit for what he did. Wonder how long before there are people that begin to just hate #4 and what him to shut up....if they dont have them already.

I'm probably 1 of the very few (in the state of Wisconsin) who isn't a fan of the guy, & my beef with Favre is that he was contemplating retirement for quite some time before he finally did "retire" this past spring - mind you after what was a damn fine season.

IMO both sides are looking a bit suspicious with their intentions; hard to judge from the media as to who's the "good guy", & who's the "bad guy" in this mess.

'Evolution' created by Offsides

#31 betterREDthandead

betterREDthandead

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,744 posts
  • Location:GPP, MI

Posted 15 July 2008 - 11:25 AM

QUOTE (timothy1997 @ July 15, 2008 - 07:13AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
comparing #4's retirement to Reggie White's isnt even a fair comparison. #4 is jerking around his retirement more similar to when Barry Sanders shocked everyone and called it a career. There are still people that hate Sanders here in Detroit for what he did. Wonder how long before there are people that begin to just hate #4 and what him to shut up....if they dont have them already.

I disagree that this is similar to Barry Sanders. Barry's timing was lousy, but there was never any ambiguity. Any rumors of his return were purely a media invention. Barry made up his mind and that was that. Other than having to suddenly replace a legend, the Lions were not in a tough spot. Not the way the Packers are now, with having made other arrangements, promises to certain guys (Rodgers), etc. The Packers have been under this cloud of "what's Brett gonna do?" for the past several years as Favre has had all kinds of trouble making up his mind. Now it's even worse. I think the Packers are far more in the lurch than the Lions were, because Lions fans were never forced to choose sides between the legend and the team.
Posted Image
"Before Detroit games, the meetings are always longer." - Nashville's Paul Kariya

#32 Packer487

Packer487

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 838 posts

Posted 15 July 2008 - 12:55 PM

QUOTE (timothy1997 @ July 15, 2008 - 06:13AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
comparing #4's retirement to Reggie White's isnt even a fair comparison. #4 is jerking around his retirement more similar to when Barry Sanders shocked everyone and called it a career. There are still people that hate Sanders here in Detroit for what he did. Wonder how long before there are people that begin to just hate #4 and what him to shut up....if they dont have them already.


Except that Reggie White retired from football, then came out of retirement to play for a different team. It hasn't tarnished his legacy, and I'd be willing to bet that Favre's return would go a whole lot better than White's did.

Favre would be comparable to Sanders if he had announced in March that he was coming back and then walked out on the team around this time, saying he thought he would be able to play again but he just can't do it. Favre hasn't screwed the Packers over. They're in an uncomfortable spot, but the offseason hasn't gone any differently than it would have if they would've given Brett Favre this time to think, like they claim they would have.

There are plenty of people who are tired of the story.

QUOTE
I'm probably 1 of the very few (in the state of Wisconsin) who isn't a fan of the guy, & my beef with Favre is that he was contemplating retirement for quite some time before he finally did "retire" this past spring - mind you after what was a damn fine season.


Who cares? The talk was got old, but do you think Favre is the only athlete out there that has "Should I or shouldn't I?" running through his head in the offseason? Strahan was doing the same thing last year and he kept his team hanging until after the preseason was over. Didn't seem to affect them too much. Favre's biggest problem is that he's too honest and sometimes he says stupid stuff and doesn't put the kabosh on things that should be nipped in the bud.

QUOTE
I disagree that this is similar to Barry Sanders. Barry's timing was lousy, but there was never any ambiguity. Any rumors of his return were purely a media invention. Barry made up his mind and that was that. Other than having to suddenly replace a legend, the Lions were not in a tough spot. Not the way the Packers are now, with having made other arrangements, promises to certain guys (Rodgers), etc. The Packers have been under this cloud of "what's Brett gonna do?" for the past several years as Favre has had all kinds of trouble making up his mind. Now it's even worse. I think the Packers are far more in the lurch than the Lions were, because Lions fans were never forced to choose sides between the legend and the team.


Wait, what? So you think it would be better if Favre had just retired on the eve of the preseason? Do you know what Green Bay's depth chart at QB would look like right now if he had done that?

Aaron Rodgers

At least in Favre's situation the team has had time to prepare and they have made other arraignments. The Packers are in a tough spot, but their season isn't screwed. If Favre comes back, they've got Favre-Rodgers-Brohm, which is as good of a situation at QB as any team in the league. If he doesn't return, they've got Rodgers-Brohm-Flynn, which has a lot of unproven talent, but is still pretty solid with two guys who were widely thought of as #1 overall picks at some point in their careers.

If Favre had never given any indication he was thinking of retiring and had walked out now, God only knows what their QB situation would look like. The only reason there's any problem with what he's doing is because Thompson has an ego and he wants to get a look at his QB. Favre has done nothing wrong by changing his mind.

#33 daft_davy

daft_davy

    hypnotic!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario

Posted 15 July 2008 - 04:33 PM

Favre tempted to show up at camp to call Packers "bluff"

wow. He says he knows this will cause a media circuis, but it might not stop him. What a guy.

#34 Packer487

Packer487

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 838 posts

Posted 15 July 2008 - 05:42 PM

QUOTE (daft_davy @ July 15, 2008 - 04:33PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Favre tempted to show up at camp to call Packers "bluff"

wow. He says he knows this will cause a media circuis, but it might not stop him. What a guy.


The Packers said he's welcome back (whether they mean it or not) and he wants to play. Why should he let the media's desire for a story stop him?

#35 timothy1997

timothy1997

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,640 posts

Posted 15 July 2008 - 06:20 PM

The problem I have with #4 is that he flip flops too much. he now says that he felt pressured by the Packers to retire. Probably because they were sick of him with the whole retired or not thing.

Thats bulls***!! His comment of pressure is an attempt to me to tarnish the GB organization.

Just retire baby!

#36 Packer487

Packer487

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 838 posts

Posted 15 July 2008 - 06:54 PM

QUOTE (timothy1997 @ July 15, 2008 - 06:20PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The problem I have with #4 is that he flip flops too much. he now says that he felt pressured by the Packers to retire. Probably because they were sick of him with the whole retired or not thing.

Thats bulls***!! His comment of pressure is an attempt to me to tarnish the GB organization.

Just retire baby!


He's flip-flopped exactly one time. He retired, and now he wants to come back. No different than Michael Jordan, Dominik Hasek, Vince Lombardi, Bill Parcells, and a slew of others.

The Packers wanted an answer before the draft/free agency. He gave them one. Then, after thinking about it for another 3 months, he decided he made the wrong choice. And based on their own comments, the Packers were pretty confident he was going to feel this way. And yet, even though they CLAIM (or at least Favre says they claim this...) they would have given him until training camp if they asked, they certainly didn't offer extra time to make up his mind.

You really doubt that the Packers were trying to get an answer out of him before he was ready to give one?

I can understand you wanting to have him retire. Maybe the Lions would have a chance to win in Green Bay at some point.....

#37 betterREDthandead

betterREDthandead

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,744 posts
  • Location:GPP, MI

Posted 15 July 2008 - 06:59 PM

QUOTE (Packer487 @ July 15, 2008 - 01:55PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Wait, what? So you think it would be better if Favre had just retired on the eve of the preseason? Do you know what Green Bay's depth chart at QB would look like right now if he had done that?

Aaron Rodgers

At least in Favre's situation the team has had time to prepare and they have made other arraignments. The Packers are in a tough spot, but their season isn't screwed. If Favre comes back, they've got Favre-Rodgers-Brohm, which is as good of a situation at QB as any team in the league. If he doesn't return, they've got Rodgers-Brohm-Flynn, which has a lot of unproven talent, but is still pretty solid with two guys who were widely thought of as #1 overall picks at some point in their careers.

If Favre had never given any indication he was thinking of retiring and had walked out now, God only knows what their QB situation would look like. The only reason there's any problem with what he's doing is because Thompson has an ego and he wants to get a look at his QB. Favre has done nothing wrong by changing his mind.

Wait, what? right back atcha. You can't claim that the depth chart would consist of one guy and then call Rodgers-Brohm-Flynn "pretty solid." Look at it this way:

If Favre retires in March and then doesn't come back, your starting quarterback is Aaron Rodgers and you have a rookie backing him up.
If Favre comes back in March then calls it quits just before preseason, your starting quarterback is Aaron Rodgers and you have a rookie backing him up.

And then you probably run out and get someone like Chris Simms, who is not a bad insurance policy. So you're set.

This way, Favre does wrong by every single quarterback on the roster and causes a media circus besides.
Posted Image
"Before Detroit games, the meetings are always longer." - Nashville's Paul Kariya

#38 betterREDthandead

betterREDthandead

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,744 posts
  • Location:GPP, MI

Posted 15 July 2008 - 07:03 PM

QUOTE (Packer487 @ July 15, 2008 - 07:54PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You really doubt that the Packers were trying to get an answer out of him before he was ready to give one?

Which they wouldn't have done if he could ever make up his mind. For two or three years now, maybe even longer, we've gone through this question with Favre: will he retire, or won't he? And each year all he ever had to was say, "Look fellas, I still want to play football." Instead every year he waffles. Can you blame the organization for getting tired of it? The draft is too important to be in a position of not knowing what your marquee player is gonna do. I doubt the Packers pressured him to retire. It wouldn't completely surprise me if that were so, but I doubt it. But I absolutely believe the Packers pressured him to make up his mind.
Posted Image
"Before Detroit games, the meetings are always longer." - Nashville's Paul Kariya

#39 mannysBETTER3434

mannysBETTER3434

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,868 posts
  • Location:Hudsonville, MI

Posted 15 July 2008 - 09:42 PM

QUOTE (betterREDthandead @ July 15, 2008 - 06:03PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Which they wouldn't have done if he could ever make up his mind. For two or three years now, maybe even longer, we've gone through this question with Favre: will he retire, or won't he? And each year all he ever had to was say, "Look fellas, I still want to play football." Instead every year he waffles. Can you blame the organization for getting tired of it? The draft is too important to be in a position of not knowing what your marquee player is gonna do. I doubt the Packers pressured him to retire. It wouldn't completely surprise me if that were so, but I doubt it. But I absolutely believe the Packers pressured him to make up his mind.


I agree with this. I don't think the Packers pressured him at all. I will use a Packer comeback here, and say "Why would the Packers pressure the starting QB of a team 1 play away from the Super Bowl to retire?"

I still question why Favre "retired" when he has said he never feels like playing at that time of year. It doesn't make sense to me. Now, the Packers are faced with a dilemma between loyalty, and a business move.

#40 rage

rage

    Nicklas ~The World's Best~ Lidstrom

  • Silver Booster
  • 3,879 posts
  • Location:Dallas, Texas!

Posted 16 July 2008 - 01:59 AM

This has almost gotten worse than the Mats Sundin bulls***.

Drama, drama, drama.

Posted Image








0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users