Shocking News - The Packers Don't Want Favre
Not really shocking.
It's been obvious all along that the Packers don't want Favre back. Aaron Rodgers is GM Ted Thompson's guy, and Favre would not be given a real opportunity to win his starting job. Favre and Mike McCarthy had their conversation on Monday that McCarthy was talking about on Sunday, in which it appears that he made it clear, once again, that they don't want Favre back, and Favre has to be the bad guy and walk out because the Packers won't release him like they should.
He added, "So they can say they welcome me back but, come on, the way they've treated me tells you the truth. They don't want me back, so let's move on. I don't know where it's headed. We'll see."
0 recs |
21 comments
Comments
I guess everybody reads these things with different tinted glasses...
The way I read Favre’s comments and actions are that he never really had any intentions of playing here unless the Packers completely reversed course, handed him the starting job, and apologized for the audacity of ever trying to replace him.
It seems to be that the best compromise at this point would be to try to work out a trade with Tampa Bay. I would prefer the Jets, but if the Packers are smart and continue to refuse to trade him within the division and Favre is stubborn and continues to want to play for a team that gives him a chance to “stick it” to Green Bay, then Tampa Bay is the best option.
The Packers play the Bucs this year – in Tampa, so we don’t have to go through the circus of Favre coming back to Lambeau Field in a different uniform – but aren’t directly competing with us for a division title and it’s only one game instead of two. We keep him out of the division and end the circus at Lambeau once and for all, and Favre gets his opportunity to try to get revenge against us on the field.
Brett needs to understand once and for all that the franchise has moved on but is prepared to keep him on the roster rather than trade him to Minnesota, and the Packers need to be prepared to take whatever they can get in return from Tampa Bay just to end this fiasco.
by Packschmid on
Aug 5, 2008 3:03 PM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs
well said
especially about the glasses part. No one has yet been able to show me a valid argument for releasing Favre without using “They owe it to him” or “If they think he’s washed up then they should just release him”, both of which are not valid arguments. How anyone can think that Brett is blameless in this situation is completely beyond me. The Packers have acted like buffoons at times but Brett has leaked every single private conversation that they have had and has changed his story so many times its ridiculous. How people can back him when it is plain and obvious that since he felt his “itch” his whole gameplan has been to go to Minnesota. If he only wanted to play in GB (as he told Greta and then repeated a number of times recently) then why did he ask for his release in June?
Can't pitch Gagne in rain. He’s like the B-2 bomber of baseball.--TheJay
by verno329 on
Aug 5, 2008 4:16 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
glass man
ironic that you speak of glass at this time
by packersinNC on
Aug 5, 2008 10:30 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
June Release
If I’m not mistaken, he was told in June that playing in GB was not an option. That’s when he asked for his release. I guess the fact that the Packer organization tried everything in their power to keep Brett retired is VALID (that is if you’re a true Packer fan). What is valid about that? I haven’t heard one valid argument other than “he’s going to hurt his legacy” or “he might go to Minnesota & we play them twice ”......not valid !!!! It’s FOOTBALL….people should shut up & let them play the game !!!
I’m OK with the Packers moving on in a new direction but this whining stuff about where Brett plays & this thing with the nonplaying offer was ridiculous and quite frankly, made the Packers look like pansies. As for leaks…..who dropped it to the media that Brett was SERIOUSLY leaning toward the buyout ; on the contrary, Brett was upset by it & faxed his papers to the Commissioner. What about the cell phone charges? Who was trying to hurt whose image? Brett hasn’t hired Ari Fliesher…...the Packers have and that just convinces me more than ever that TT can’t be trusted & that the Packers is a crooked organization. Ted Thompson has hurt the image of the Packer organization…..not Brett. Brett just held the door open so we could PEEK in. Now….it’s crystal clear. As for Minnesota, Brett mentioned Minnesota AFTER he was rejected by the Packers. Personally, I don’t blame Brett for wanting to stick it to the Packers. He’s human and I think some people keep forgetting that. Some refer to Brett as PROPERTY OF THE PACKERS…...property (bench, clipboard, cap) doesn’t have emotions. Every action has a reaction…...he’s HUMAN !!!!
Seriously, I think Ted appeared desperate in his attempt to buyout Brett . Of course the logic is, it would give the team an advantage on the playing field. I ask….what kind of message does this send to the team in the locker room? I guess the players don’t feel appreciated for all their hard work. It seems like the GM and the coach doesn’t have 100% faith in their team. Brett is not totally blameless in all of this but I think the Packers created more of this circus than Brett. I hope they continue to be proud of their choices and I hope the true Packer fans stand behind the team. Unfortunately, if they begin losing…..many so-called fans will slowly disappear .
Their is an old proverb that states: He who lives in a glass house shouldn’t throw stones. I think the Packers could learn from this saying. Maybe they will.
Good Luck to the Packer’s “Team” & Good Luck to Brett !!!!
by packersinNC on
Aug 6, 2008 4:49 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Their is an old proverb that states: He who lives in a glass house shouldn’t throw stones. I think the Packers could learn from this saying. Maybe they will.
Brett’s houses better not be made of glass either, or he’s got some serious cleanup to do as well.
Brett is not totally blameless in all of this but I think the Packers created more of this circus than Brett. I hope they continue to be proud of their choices and I hope the true Packer fans stand behind the team. Unfortunately, if they begin losing…..many so-called fans will slowly disappear .
You mean just like you are disappearing?
Some refer to Brett as PROPERTY OF THE PACKERS……property (bench, clipboard, cap) doesn’t have emotions. Every action has a reaction……he’s HUMAN !!!!
I would have thought a rational person could figure out that saying that he is the Packers property doesn’t equate him with a bench or a clipboard. Being under contract makes him their property, not in the sense that they tell him what to do, how to behave, or where to sleep, but in the sense that they control where he plays. Thats how contracts work. Obviously he’s a human. He is entitled to have a reaction and be emotional. His emotion is one of the things I have liked and respected about him the most during his playing days. But EVERY player would be emotional and have a reaction to not being welcomed back to the team. They all just don’t think that they deserve to be released so they can go stick it to their former team. What if Donald Driver now said that he only wants to play for Brett Favre? Should we release him so he can go wherever Brett goes? He’s a human too.
As for leaks…..who dropped it to the media that Brett was SERIOUSLY leaning toward the buyout ; on the contrary, Brett was upset by it & faxed his papers to the Commissioner.
Did TT steal Brett’s cell phone and send text messages to Ed Werder saying that he was seriously considering taking the deal? I must have missed that. Boy, TT must be really slimy to pull that off.
Brett hasn’t hired Ari Fliesher
No, but perhaps he should look into hiring someone to help him with his PR. Maybe then he wouldn’t contradict himself at every opportunity.
Can't pitch Gagne in rain. He’s like the B-2 bomber of baseball.--TheJay
by verno329 on
Aug 6, 2008 7:15 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
moving on
I couldn’t help but notice that you had no reply in regards to those that think Brett should stay retired to protect his legacy or moreso, to prevent him from playing against the Packers in the 2008 season. No response in regards to the bribe offered by GB. Valid thinking…..I think not.
Yeap, Brett made that call & said MAYBE it’s the best answer in the end but….....he wasn’t comfortable with it because it was defeating his whole purpose which was “he wanted to play football”. Through all of this….Brett has never wanted to hurt his teammates regardless as to how some may spin this. As far as the organization, I don’t think he really gives a crap about the organization at this point and neither would I. You bet your sweet a$$, I would let the story unfold in it’s entirety and that my dear love is where Ari Fliesher steps in…...damage control ! The Packers will need it more than Brett in the end & I wouldn’t be surprised to see some upcoming changes in the Packer organization before long. I will never say that TT hasn’t made some good choices in players; he has. However, I will say that his ego got in his way on this one & he became very vindictive. Brett responded….and made some mistakes along the way also. Just as Brett isn’t bigger than the Packer organization, you will see in the end that Thompson isn’t bigger than the league. Brett is good for the league regardless of where he plays and when you remove all of the drama…..bottomline it’s still about football. Thompson turned this into a political arena & has now hired a politician to help him out of the mess.
As for being a disappearing Packer fan, I never said I was one nor have I ever said that I was a Favre fan. I have no dogs in this race which is why I feel I am seeing it as it presents itself.
From here, my point of view only, the Packer organization has alot of secrets & the team (& the fans) is ultimately going to pay the price. I wish Brett’s ex-teammates the best in 2008; however, I also wish Brett the best. I really think that the best way for the Packer organization to save face throughout all of this would be to simply release Brett and deal with the consequences. Ted & Mike need to put 100% faith in their team & I think that releasing Brett will be the best way to convince the team (& fans) that they are confident with their decision to move on with Aaron. I truely feel that by releasing Brett instead of making a trade that will keep Brett from competing against them will put all of this behind us and we could get back to football. Brett could move on, the Packers could move on & ultimately the football league could move on.
by packersinNC on
Aug 6, 2008 2:03 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Alright then, here you go
I couldn’t help but notice that you had no reply in regards to those that think Brett should stay retired to protect his legacy or moreso, to prevent him from playing against the Packers in the 2008 season. No response in regards to the bribe offered by GB. Valid thinking…..I think not.
You are right when you say that no one needs to protect Brett’s legacy besides Brett. I’m not sure who the “those that think” is in your question. Is it TT? The fact that they are concerned with protecting Brett’s legacy is not so wrong. If that concern becomes more than concern, then you have a point. Do you have any comment on McCarthy’s belief that Brett is still not ready to commit fully to the work that is needed during the week (film and such) to be successful? He said that he thinks Brett is too emotional now to properly make any commitment.
As for preventing him from playing the Packers in 2008, I still can’t understand your logic here. Is the job of a GM to acquiesce to any whim a superstar that is under contract makes, even if it directly improves your main competition? Cause thats not how I understand the role of a GM. Frankly, the fact that Brett has stated publicly that he either wants to play for the Packers or play against them just confirms to me what McCarthy said. Brett is too emotional now to be making these decisions. He feels hurt by the Packers and now just wants revenge. If he would think clearly and not emotionally about this he would understand that coming out and playing for the Vikings might accomplish his immediate goal of hurting the image of TT, but would also accomplish a different goal by insulting the fans who have supported him through ups and downs throughout the years by coming out as a part of their arch rival. Again, Brett is not thinking clearly and only thinking of the immediate impact.
I truely feel that by releasing Brett instead of making a trade that will keep Brett from competing against them will put all of this behind us and we could get back to football
If they are going to let Brett go to the Vikings why wouldn’t you want the Packers to get something in return, even if its a low draft pick, as opposed to getting squat by releasing him. I know you don’t care about the Packers but what would giving him away for free accomplish?
Can't pitch Gagne in rain. He’s like the B-2 bomber of baseball.--TheJay
by verno329 on
Aug 6, 2008 4:42 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
sorry...forgot about the "bribe" stuff
As for the “bribe,” how is it a bribe when Murphy told Favre that this offer still stands even if he plays for another team this year? How is saying that we want to continue this relationship even if you play somewhere else this year a slap in the face? You now admit that Brett is responsible for “leaking” that he was considering the “bribe”
Yeap, Brett made that call & said MAYBE it’s the best answer in the end but……..he wasn’t comfortable with it because it was defeating his whole purpose which was "he wanted to play football".and I have no problem with the fact that he changed his mind (at this point I would expect nothing less from him) but this still represents more disrespect in your eyes?
Did you notice how Brett also passed some blame to Goodell by saying that everyone knew the reason that he was actually at camp was because Goodell reinstated him? How does he think that happened? Did Goodell randomly choose a retired player to reinstate? No, you filed the reinstatement papers, Brett.
Can't pitch Gagne in rain. He’s like the B-2 bomber of baseball.--TheJay
by verno329 on
Aug 6, 2008 4:58 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
trade
Obviously Brett & McCarthy agreed on one thing, it’s too much water under the bridge for Brett to play in GB (unless management happened to change). I do agree; Brett has taken this very personal…... rightfully so. I believe Brett truely wanted to play for the Packers; however, I think he realized that things would never be the same for him in GB. Brett knew that it was too much for him to sweep under a rug…..rightfully so.
Did you also notice in that press conference, it was always about Brett & his emotions? How Brett responded and how Brett couldn’t committ. Nothing about the Packers of course. The Packers contributed to those emotions and McCarthy knows the truth….he’s not fooling anyone. I’m a firm believer….what goes around comes around. I swear….I don’t know how people sleep at night.
Maybe Brett does want some revenge….so what? The best team wins…..right? That’s football. .....deal with it ! Thompson & McCarthy are convinced that Aaron can lead the Packers to a winning season. If that’s so, it would make good business sense to get the best trade possible (short-term & long-term). Yet, they are shutting some of the teams out which I totally disagree with. It seems to me that they are so focused on making sure that Brett doesn’t get the satisfaction of playing against them that they are losing focus of what is important….the team. I think Thompson’s ego is once again getting in the way of the team. He just wants to keep on and on stabbing Brett by putting him where he doesn’t want to be. The man is totally RUTHLESS! I just think they are hurting their image. It’s just my opinion.
With that being said, how could they actually ask him to be an ambassador for the Packer organization? SLAP! SLAP ! And really now....who does it benefit the most? Brett's legacy is his.....he doesn't need the Packer organization; that stands on its own.
by packersinNC on
Aug 6, 2008 11:52 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
oops....my last statement follows
How could they actually ask him to be an ambassador for the Packer organization? Slap! Slap! Really now…...who does that benefit? Brett’s legacy is his; he doesn’t need the Packer organization. His legacy stands on its own.
by packersinNC on
Aug 6, 2008 11:58 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The same old politics...
Brett Favre, for the duration of his career, was viewed as the patron saint of all that was good in the NFL. You really would have to look no further than how the media treated/s him to agree with me.
The problem Packers brass is facing right now is that they simply cannot win a PR battle with #4. It just is not posible. Sure there are few columnists here and there that call out Favre, but overall this story has evolved to the point where Favre has been taken advantage of, etc etc.
Allow me to put forth a hypothetical situation to you all: After 4 years of a relationship that was enjoyable for both you and your girlfriend/boyfriend, your significant other decides it is time to move on. Naturally you would feel depressed, melancholy, and possibly angry. Once you had spent the first few weeks post-breakup listening to Barry Manilow play constantly from your stereo while crying alone on your sofa in the dark, you would have only one choice: to move on.
Flash forward to a few months later. Your friends and family have really been there for you, helping you get past the relationship. Sure you may be single, but after a little while, you decide to finally make a move on that waitress who had caught your eye a while back. You take her Irish dancing one night, maybe grab some sushi on another, and before you know it you’re dating the waitress. Everything seems to be working out right?
Then, one day while you are walking back from work on a gorgeous fall day, you run into your ex. You engage in the casual pleasantries, ask her how things are going, whether or not she finally was able to get that dress that had been backordered when you broke up, things of that nature. Suddenly, she starts to break down in tears, jumps into your arms, and sobbingly confesses she made a mistake and that she never should have left you.
Let’s analyze this situation. You are over this girl, for all intents and purposes. Sure, there’s no hate present, but it sure is not love anymore. You gave her back everything she had left in your apartment, and even sold some of the stuff both of you had bought. You’re dating another woman whose company is really enjoyable, and there is a future in your viewpoint. Your friends and family all know the relationship ended a long time ago, and they of course have spent the past few months attempting to comfort you saying things along the lines of, "She was never right for you anyways." Are you going to take back your ex, and pretend that the past few months just never happened?
Favre made the choice to retire; and he reiterated that decision before the draft. The Packers probably are a better team with Favre, but at what cost do you sacrifice long term success? I doubt that the Packers could play better with Brett this year, but who knows? The only way Favre’s return would be acceptable is if the Packers were to win the SB. That is the ONLY reason for bringing him back. If the Packers make the playoffs but get bounced in the divisional or conference round, then what was accomplished?
It would seem apparent to me Favre never really wanted to return to the Packers, and somehow expected that because he played for a long time in Green Bay, he’s deserving of special treatment. Really? I know that as a normal joe, if I signed a contract, I wouldn’t expect to just be let out of it, no matter how long that business relationship had lasted.
TT and MM have made mistakes in this business, but I am terribly confused as to what else could have been done. Just release Favre, and get absolutely nothing for him? That makes absolutely no sense. Trading him makes even better sense, but shocker of shockers, Favre refused to go to the teams he doesn’t want to be traded to. Are the Packers asking for a high price? yes they are, and they should BE! Does anyone doubt Favre can’t still gunsling it up? It’s just a matter of fit, and right now, Favre coming back to the Packers would be a mistake. Thompsons would have absolutely zero credibility and influence, McCarthy would have been immasculated, and guess what folks? Those two are responsible for the Packers renaissance. Favre has always been Favre, when those two came along they brought the strategy, plan, and players with them.
by jeff25624 on
Aug 5, 2008 5:13 PM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree
And I love your analogy. I’m a Saints fan from New Orleans, but was just checking up on this blog to see about Favre news. I love your relationship analogy, as I’ve been thinking about this in the same terms.
I really hope Favre somehow manages to get traded within the division, though it seems unlikely. Hell, I really just hope he doesn’t get traded to the Bucs. I don’t want the Saints to have to face him twice in a year.
Is it wrong that I appreciate when there is drama in other teams’ camps? How about Steve Smith punching a teammate? Is it wrong that I like distractions against a division rival? Anyway, sorry that your team is facing this drama, but I have to admit that it’s good reading.
by jjwest11 on
Aug 5, 2008 5:39 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm not sure the analogy...
to play and I think on the right team he can be a factor but taking him back at this point does more damage to the Packers than helps them. As was said before, the ONLY reason to bring him back as the starter at this point is if you really believe he gets you the Lombardi Trophy. Anything less and all invoworks quite right due to the VERY public nature of the relationship. Perhaps if the ex was Brad Pitt and the one-who-has-moved-on was Jennifer Anniston…but I digress. I don’t envy you Packer fans the position both your team and one of your heroes has put you in. In my view it would be like John Elway coming back and only accepting a trade to Oakland. I would likely be very angry at Elway for forcing me to choose between my team and the man who meant so much to my team. In this situation it looks as if Favre has used the love of his fans against the organization for selfish ends. I don’t blame the man for wantinglved lose credibilty.
Elway is in, Zimm is in but don't forget: Floyd Little, Randy Gradishar, Steve Atwater & Terrel Davis
by BlueNOrangeNIdaho on
Aug 6, 2008 12:24 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
oops...
Formatting went all haywire there…I hate touchpad mice on laptops :\
Elway is in, Zimm is in but don't forget: Floyd Little, Randy Gradishar, Steve Atwater & Terrel Davis
by BlueNOrangeNIdaho on
Aug 6, 2008 12:27 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I know we need some PR help
but I would really love to keep anybody from the Bush administration away from the Packers organization.
Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey
by jobe on
Aug 6, 2008 12:04 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
the way I see it
The way I see it, Brett showed up to play, and the Packers closed the door. Since “we’ve moved on” and “Brett’s not in the right mindset to play here” is the official word from the Packers camp, I find myself mulling over the interpersonal dynamics. I’m convinced this is a battle of ego’s and Mccarthy has outdone Farve on this. Too bad for Packer fans, I’m inclined to think that at this stage in his career, Brett is uncoachable. He is a gunslinger and will do things his way, as he has done for years. Mccarthy resents Brett’s bigger than the team persona and coach want’s a slice of that pie. For Mccarthy what’s best for the team has been trumped by what is best for coach. He simply want’s to be the man, and with Farve in town, that isn’t happening. According to reports, Farve has given plenty of consideration to his teamates and wanted to avoid being a distraction, so he walked away. Once again, the Packers fans are the X factor here and lose out. If I were a diehard fan I would be danged upset.
by feworker on
Aug 6, 2008 1:00 PM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs
A little unfair...
You just said it yourself – “Brett is uncoachable.” If the other 52 guys on a football team have to be held accountable for their decisions and actions, then why not #4?
Keep in mind that Favre’s ridiculous throw to Corey Webster in the NFC Championship Game effectively ended the Packers’ season – just like a ridiculous throw he made in overtime against the Eagles killed the Super Bowl chances of the 2003 team. Now, you might say that the Packers wouldn’t have been in that position in the first place if not for Favre, and I wouldn’t argue with you, but at this stage of the program that Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy have built, the only way to have another season with Brett Favre be positive and successful is for him to win a Super Bowl, and I just don’t think he’s capable anymore (and, according to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, neither did the Packers)
The time is right to move on. I don’t begrudge Favre’s right to play, and I don’t begrudge the Packers’ right to trade him to another team outside their division and protect their interests.
Football is a business – as cold as it is, the Packers don’t “owe” anything to Brett Favre. They don’t owe him a starting position, they don’t owe him his release, they don’t owe him a trade to their closest division rival.
It’s possible to support both sides of this ugly divorce – one side doesn’t have to be right for the other side to be wrong… both sides have handled things badly, but both sides have valid positions, and it looks like (unless Brett changes his mind again) we’re going to see a workable solution where the Packers get to move on with their lives, and Brett lives to gunsling again…
by Packschmid on
Aug 6, 2008 2:35 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I’m picking up what your laying down Packsmith. Like the way Farve plays the game, I’m probably guilty of tossing the emotional softball at this one. Your reasoned response is a better way to approach the whole deal. Certainly, there’s more than enough blame to spread around here, but what good possibly comes of that? I can support both sides, thanks for the clarity.
It is a fascinating story though. Can there be two winners? Not likely. I’m not a diehard Packer fan (long live the Black and Gold) but have rooted for them for many years with Farve at the helm. My point was that Mccarthy won this battle of egos. This isnt going to endear him to fans such as me. For the record, I will probably root for Farve in the event he squares off against his former team.
Whether or not Farve is capable of winning another SB, I am not convinced he isn’t. I do think he can still play at high level and it remains to be seen if the FO decision to go in another direction at the most critical position will pan out. In most cases it takes a special QB to win a SB. If Rodgers totally bombs, the plot will thicken. If he brings home the goods, then Mccarthy’s a genuis.
I’m left with the notion that Farve’s a gunslinger and Mccarthy’s a gambler. I still like the guy with the gun.
by feworker on
Aug 6, 2008 7:38 PM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs









