Brett Favre

[Big John]

Really?  Are you talking about the Packers' front office?  The players?  Both?

 

Up until now, I had thought Favre earned the right to stay or leave on his own terms, but this is getting really silly.  He needs to let the team know his plans before the draft.  He can't pull a Ricky Williams.

 

1411392[/snapback]

 

 

 

Part of both, but more the front office.

[Wolverines Fan]

Part of both, but more the front office.

 

1411421[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

That's what I figured. He probably has a few of the fans mad at him, too.

[Chavez]

That's what I figured.  He probably has a few of the fans mad at him, too.

 

1411456[/snapback]

 

 

 

I wouldn't say "mad" but myself and 2 of my buddies (both of whom have Packer tattoos) were talking the other day and the attitude was "we love ya Brett, but give the drama a rest."

[Randall]

Fixed.

 

Don't be stupid, people. The news conference wasn't supposed to be about the Packers. IT WAS A CHARITY EVENT.

 

Does anyone have a problem with calling a news conference to announce the future endeavors of a charity foundation?

 

Chers. 

 

1411378[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Favre has hosted a news conference in conjunction with his golf tournament in each of the past 10 years.

 

I have to say I understand wanting a competetive team. They need to fix the o line and it may take the drat to do it. With the new blocking scheme they may be able to get FA's dropped from other teams and later round picks.

 

Comparing Brett to Ricky is wrong. He just wants the chance to win and not get killed. I don't blame him for that.

[Swiss Cheezhead]

Favre has hosted a news conference in conjunction with his golf tournament in each of the past 10 years.

 

1411698[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Exactly -- but because the media was HOPING for an announcement and didn't get one, the media will continue to lash out at him.

 

It's just sad that people are now accusing Brett of "drama" because he had a news conference at his charity event.

[Outshined]

Exactly -- but because the media was HOPING for an announcement and didn't get one, the media will continue to lash out at him.

 

It's just sad that people are now accusing Brett of "drama" because he had a news conference at his charity event.

 

1411902[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Would you expect anything less from them? They are mad because they didn't get their story.

 

He should make his decision soon...I think the team should know before the draft if he is playing. Its only fair...They have mini camps shortly after that. Will he participate in those?

[thecerwin]

It's just sad that people are now accusing Brett of "drama" because he had a news conference at his charity event.

 

1411902[/snapback]

 

 

 

He was being accused of the drama before the charity event.

[Chavez]

It's just sad that people are now accusing Brett of "drama" because he had a news conference at his charity event.

 

1411902[/snapback]

 

 

 

I am accusing him of "drama" because we had this same scenario play out LAST year, and a lower-temperature version of it the year before that.

 

And really, I'm sure it is a hard decision, and the media certainly isn't free from culpability in perpetuating the soap opera - but at some point (a point we've passed, IMO) Favre has a responsibility to the TEAM to let them know whether he's in or out - and either way, it's OK with me. I just think if he retires it was to some extent highly selfish for him to leave them in a bit of a bind regarding QB depth when adequate backups to Rodgers/short-term starters/possible long-term replacements were out there to be had in FA.

[Randall]

Would you expect anything less from them? They are mad because they didn't get their story.

 

He should make his decision soon...I think the team should know before the draft if he is playing. Its only fair...They have mini camps shortly after that. Will he participate in those?

 

1411916[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

He wants to know that he'll have a decent offensive line and since TT hasn't addressed that yet forcing a decision will force him to retire or ask to be cut.

 

Brett will have to wait until after the draft to see the team he's given. I have to say I support him on that. He wants a chance to win.

 

Last year when Wahle and Rivera were both allowed to leave, what was the reason for it? I thought it was a salary cap issue, but then heard they have a lot of cap money. If they are completely rebuilding I think Favre will leave.

Edited April 9, 2006 by Randall

[Chavez]

Last year when Wahle and Rivera were both allowed to leave, what was the reason for it? I thought it was a salary cap issue, but then heard they have a lot of cap money. If they are completely rebuilding I think Favre will leave.

 

1411925[/snapback]

 

 

 

Wahle it was a cap issue - they were pretty snug against the cap last year; paying Wahle the bonus he was due (I'm thinking it was over $5 mil) would have completely hamstrung them in FA. With Rivera, I think it was similar to why Flanagan was let go - it was an age/injury thing - both are over 30 and coming off significant injuries, and Dal and Hou paid them more than GB was willing.

 

Personally, I think Thompson's philosophy is sound as far as not overpaying and exercising fiscal restraint go - now it's a matter of seeing if he can judge talent. While GB did bottom out last year, let's look at the situation compared to other teams:

 

1) even though Green Bay ended up at 4-12, they were competitive in most every game

 

2) they have a reasonable base of talent (bookend OTs, Pro Bowl TE and WR, solid DL, nice young MLB in Barnett, solid half of a defensive backfield in Collins and Harris) to build upon; maybe more if some of their draft picks from last year (Murphy, Poppinga) come back from injury

 

3) unlike when teams like Ten and SF fell off the face of the earth, they don't face multiple years of cap hell - they are in great shape this year, and will be in BETTER shape next year

 

Would I say the Packers are in "great" shape? No team that goes 4-12 should be necessarily claiming that. But I've certainly seen teams in WORSE shape.

[Puddy]

I am accusing him of "drama" because we had this same scenario play out LAST year, and a lower-temperature version of it the year before that.

 

And really, I'm sure it is a hard decision, and the media certainly isn't free from culpability in perpetuating the soap opera - but at some point (a point we've passed, IMO) Favre has a responsibility to the TEAM to let them know whether he's in or out - and either way, it's OK with me. I just think if he retires it was to some extent highly selfish for him to leave them in a bit of a bind regarding QB depth when adequate backups to Rodgers/short-term starters/possible long-term replacements were out there to be had in FA.

 

1411922[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Wurd.

[Big Score 1]

He wants to know that he'll have a decent offensive line and since TT hasn't addressed that yet forcing a decision will force him to retire or ask to be cut.

1411925[/snapback]

 

 

While I don't necessarily blame him for wanting Green Bay to put a better O'Line in front of him, how many other NFL QB's have you ever heard say "Get me a better O'Line or I quit"?

[Randall]

While I don't necessarily blame him for wanting Green Bay to put a better O'Line in front of him, how many other NFL QB's have you ever heard say "Get me a better O'Line or I quit"?

 

1412027[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

That isn't what he said. That's my interpretation of what he said. What he did say is he wants to win, not necessarily the SB but compete for it.

 

How many QB's in their final year don't want to win?

[Chavez]

While I don't necessarily blame him for wanting Green Bay to put a better O'Line in front of him, how many other NFL QB's have you ever heard say "Get me a better O'Line or I quit"?

 

1412027[/snapback]

 

 

 

Heck, even that whiner Manning didn't say that while throwing his OL under the bus.

[Big Score 1]

That isn't what he said. That's my interpretation of what he said.

1412032[/snapback]

 

 

 

No, it's not just an interpretation by you Randall.

It pretty much is what Favre has said, just not so bluntly.

What he did say is he wants to win, not necessarily the SB but compete for it.

1412032[/snapback]

 

 

 

Right on Randall...and to that end Favre has said, and I quote Favre from his Golf Charity;

By TOM SILVERSTEIN

Posted: April 8, 2006

 

Later, as he waited for his turn to tee off at the 10th hole, he started asking the questions that are obviously affecting his decision.

 

"So what’s going on up there?" Favre asked. "What are they doing? Have they signed anybody?"

 

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

How many QB's in their final year don't want to win?

1412032[/snapback]

 

 

I think last year was his final year Randall.

Favre's been a pretty straight shooter in that his decision to return will based on what TT does to put a team out there that Favre thinks is truly capable of being competitive.

 

Again, not saying I totally disagree with him, but how many QB's have you ever heard of, basically saying "Field a team that I think is up to snuff, or I quit"?

 

I also think this may be why Favre is taking so long in his decision. He's giving TT as much time as possible, to make some moves that Favre thinks are positive.

[Swiss Cheezhead]

Wahle it was a cap issue - they were pretty snug against the cap last year; paying Wahle the bonus he was due (I'm thinking it was over $5 mil) would have completely hamstrung them in FA.

 

1411953[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Being hamstrung in FA would have been a valid excuse if they had tried to do more in FA after cutting him. There's just no way they should have let Wahle go. I mean, they just had to get a little creative with the first year of his contract. Why not assign him a big roster bonus THIS year, knowing we'd be $20 million under the cap? I'm sure he would have been fine with that.

 

The bottom line is that Wahle fits TT's description of a "worthy" player perfectly. Lots of talent, in his prime, injury-free. Plus, he's better than any FA because he knew the system. That's the type of player that even the most frugal GM needs to keep. I think TT learned that lesson this year and consequently re-signed Kamp.

 

Personally, I think Thompson's philosophy is sound as far as not overpaying and exercising fiscal restraint go - now it's a matter of seeing if he can judge talent. While GB did bottom out last year, let's look at the situation compared to other teams:

 

1) even though Green Bay ended up at 4-12, they were competitive in most every game

 

2) they have a reasonable base of talent (bookend OTs, Pro Bowl TE and WR, solid DL, nice young MLB in Barnett, solid half of a defensive backfield in Collins and Harris) to build upon; maybe more if some of their draft picks from last year (Murphy, Poppinga) come back from injury

 

3) unlike when teams like Ten and SF fell off the face of the earth, they don't face multiple years of cap hell - they are in great shape this year, and will be in BETTER shape next year

 

Would I say the Packers are in "great" shape? No team that goes 4-12 should be necessarily claiming that. But I've certainly seen teams in WORSE shape.

 

1411953[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

1) Agreed.

2) You mean Hawkins, not Murphy, right?

3) Agreed.

 

Other than cutting Wahle, I don't necessarily have a problem with any one decision Thompson has made. I just have a problem with people who are lashing out at Favre.

 

I've tried, but I can't come up with any FA QB who would have signed with the Packers, had Favre retired in February. Seriously, who? Thompson wouldn't have targeted Kitna anyway, but if he did, Kitna would have signed with Detroit for more money and a better opportunity to start. There was no way Nall would have stayed, regardless of Favre's decision. He knew Rodgers was "Thompson's guy" and that he wouldn't get a fair shake. McCown? Does anyone really think Thompson would have let another young QB compete with his first 1st-round pick? I don't. And, as for someone like Brees, there's just no WAY TT would have given a guy with a shoulder injury the kind of money he got in New Orleans.

 

Thompson knows that Aaron Rodgers will make or break his career as GM of the Packers. Imagine...he brings in someone like McCown and, God forbid, McCown beats out Rodgers for the starting job. Immediately, fans and the media turn up the volume on the Rodgers-is-a-bust commentary.

 

I honestly believe that Favre's indecision is not having any real effect on the team's plans.

Edited April 10, 2006 by Swiss Cheezhead

[Chavez]

Being hamstrung in FA would have been a valid excuse if they had tried to do more in FA after cutting him. There's just no way they should have let Wahle go. I mean, they just had to get a little creative with the first year of his contract. Why not assign him a big roster bonus THIS year, knowing we'd be $20 million under the cap? I'm sure he would have been fine with that.

 

The bottom line is that Wahle fits TT's description of a "worthy" player perfectly. Lots of talent, in his prime, injury-free. Plus, he's better than any FA because he knew the system. That's the type of player that even the most frugal GM needs to keep. I think TT learned that lesson this year and consequently re-signed Kamp.

And while it sucked to lose Wahle, it's nice to have a GM who is not too arrogant to learn a lesson (yes, I'm looking at you, Mike Sherman).

 

2) You mean Hawkins, not Murphy, right?

 

No, I mean Terrence Murphy; it doesn't look good, but he hasn't been 100% ruled done if IIRC. As far as I know, Hawkins was healthy, they were just being very gentle with him due to his inexperience - if we get a top DB coach (I know Washington is there as an ass't, forget who the main guy is) who can coach him up, the kid has sick talent.

 

 

I can't come up with any FA QB who would have signed with the Packers, had Favre retired in February. Seriously, who? Thompson wouldn't have targeted Kitna anyway, but if he did, Kitna would have signed with Detroit for more money and a better opportunity to start. There was no way Nall would have stayed, regardless of Favre's decision. He knew Rodgers was "Thompson's guy" and that he wouldn't get a fair shake. McCown? Does anyone really think Thompson would have let another young QB compete with his first 1st-round pick? I don't. And, as for someone like Brees, there's just no WAY TT would have given a guy with a shoulder injury the kind of money he got in New Orleans.(I'm pretty glad of that, personally)

 

Thompson knows that Aaron Rodgers will make or break his career as GM of the Packers. Imagine...he brings in someone like McCown and, God forbid, McCown beats out Rodgers for the starting job. Immediately, fans and the media turn up the volume on the Rodgers-is-a-bust commentary.

 

I honestly believe that Favre's indecision is not having any real effect on the team's plans.

 

1413136[/snapback]

 

 

 

You make some good points - I think you're correct in that the main plan remains the same, but if Favre comes out and says "I'm done" I think that having known that earlier, TT may have made a move for a low-cost guy with "backup" stamped on his forehead, like a Harrington or Garcia. Of course, things being as they are, should GB need it, there will probably be plenty of serviceable vets cut in training camp (I don't think anyone expects Buf to carry Holcomb, Losman, and Nall all season, for example).

 

Again, I like Thompson's philosophy and am on board with it; the main concern is "can he find the hidden nuggets like Belicheck does in NE?" and "can he get good players in the draft?" It's too early to judge on last year's draft, but disregarding injury, at least half the picks looked like they could stick in the NFL (Collins was all-rookie, Murphy and Poppinga looked decent until injured, Montgomery, Whitticker fell off but showed promise early, Underwood and Hawkins looked like typical rookies, etc).

[Swiss Cheezhead]

And while it sucked to lose Wahle, it's nice to have a GM who is not too arrogant to learn a lesson (yes, I'm looking at you, Mike Sherman).

 

1413159[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Absolutely. I gained a lot of respect for Thompson after he re-signed Kampman.

 

No, I mean Terrence Murphy; it doesn't look good, but he hasn't been 100% ruled done if IIRC. As far as I know, Hawkins was healthy, they were just being very gentle with him due to his inexperience - if we get a top DB coach (I know Washington is there as an ass't, forget who the main guy is) who can coach him up, the kid has sick talent.

 

1413159[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Ahh...I misread your sentence. You were talking about the defensive backfield, then switched to their other draft picks. :doah: My bad. And, yes, regardless of what happens with his health, Murphy was a good pick. If not for the freak back issue, having a healthy Murphy this year would have been SWEET, considering the Walker debacle.

 

As for Hawkins, I think if he'll be very good in time. I've read some interviews with him and it's obvious he has the rare desire to be great. He doesn't seem to care about being a late-round pick -- he just wants to learn and improve.

 

You make some good points - I think you're correct in that the main plan remains the same, but if Favre comes out and says "I'm done" I think that having known that earlier, TT may have made a move for a low-cost guy with "backup" stamped on his forehead, like a Harrington or Garcia. Of course, things being as they are, should GB need it, there will probably be plenty of serviceable vets cut in training camp (I don't think anyone expects Buf to carry Holcomb, Losman, and Nall all season, for example).

 

1413159[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

You put it more succinctly than I did -- "'backup' stamped on his forehead" definitely would have been a prerequisite for a QB signing in GB.

 

And I agree with you about about finding a decent backup-stamped veteran either after the June cuts or in training camp. Hell, Collins is still out there to this day. I'm not super-concerned about the back-up QB position if Rodgers is the starter. It will be a "developmental" year no matter what.

 

Again, I like Thompson's philosophy and am on board with it; the main concern is "can he find the hidden nuggets like Belicheck does in NE?" and "can he get good players in the draft?" It's too early to judge on last year's draft, but disregarding injury, at least half the picks looked like they could stick in the NFL (Collins was all-rookie, Murphy and Poppinga looked decent until injured, Montgomery, Whitticker fell off but showed promise early, Underwood and Hawkins looked like typical rookies, etc).

 

1413159[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I completely agree, with no reservation. I think Thompson has given us very few reasons to doubt his ability as a GM. Also, you're totally right about judging a GM based on how many "nuggets" he finds and, in general, how productive his draft picks become. I agree, if we're judging his only draft one year later, however premature that may be, Thompson certainly looks pretty smart. At this point, it looks like we got SIX future starters from that class -- Rodgers, Collins, Poppinga, Hawkins, Whitticker, and Murphy (if healthy). Underwood, Coston, and Montgomery are still on the roster, which is impressive.

[Swiss Cheezhead]

The following is an interesting take from PFT...

 

WE'VE FINALLY FIGURED OUT FAVRE'S GAME

 

We're finally staring to realize why Lord Favre is whining about the Packers' failure to sign free agents. 

 

In our view, it's all part an effort to set Favre up to receive zero blame if the Packers suck in 2006 -- and all of the credit if they turn it around.  Although many NFL observers are quick to presume that the Packers won't be any good this year, eight of their 12 losses in 2005 came by seven points or less.  The team also had extensive injury issues, with guys like Ahman Green and Najeh Davenport and Javon Walker missing extensive amounts of time.

 

So that's why, in our view, Favre continues to bash the moves that the front office hasn't made.  In his final NFL season, Favre wants to be either the hero or not the goat.

 

Why else would Favre continue to diss the lack of offseason moves, but not retire?  He says he wants the team to make an acquisition that has the same impact as Reggie White's arrival did in 1993.  But yet Favre knows that the bulk of the free agents have already been signed by other teams, and that nothing the team does in the draft will have much of an impact this year.

 

Still, Favre continued to chirp about the issue while waiting to tee off on the 10th hole of his celebrity golf tournament.

 

"So what's going on up there?" Favre said. "What are they doing?  Have they signed anybody?"

 

He knows darn well what's going on.  And he wants to be certain before he says he's coming back that G.M. Ted Thompson will take the rap if the team ends up 4-12, or worse, in 2006.

 

 

I don't necessarily agree that it's Favre intention to create this ridiculous media frenzy, but the end result could be accurate. If he comes back and wins, he'll get a TON of credit. If he comes back and they lose, Thompson will look pretty bad.

 

Still, I think Favre knows that taking this long to decide is hurting his reputation more than it could ever help.

 

Obviously, to me, Favre isn't doing anything wrong by waiting this long. But to most others, he's not the same deity he used to be.