Super Twinky Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Fair warning, this is only my opinion... I think Favre has already made his decision to play one more year, and is holding out to tell the general public until after the draft for a reason. TT, McCarthy, and Favre's agent have known this for awhile now. By him holding out, it gives the Packers a distinct extra edge towards trading down in the draft. The packers are staging it as if they would really want to take a QB at #5. So all you Favre bashers might want to consider that he is actually going through all this media madness right now for the team. What a guy to put up with all that for the sake of draft positioning! Rodgers will be the guy once Favre leaves, and he knows it. This is another part of the spin the Packers are putting on this. The media has really ran with the stuff on Rodgers not performing up to par, and Rodgers himself is even playing along with this. Where did this come from anyways? I haven't heard any of it come from a reliable source. Favre will be back for one more year. I have always hoped that he would let everyone know when his last year was, so I could be sure to get an extra ticket for my wife. (she has never seen Favre play, or been to a Packers game) Even if it is a losing season, the crowd would be even more amazing and sweet, since it would be his last season. Anyways, my draft wish list? If the Pack isn't able to trade down, they will pick Williams or Hawk for sure IMO. Maybe even Ferguson. Davis is great, but a stretch...a QB's is a huge stretch too. They NEED a WR in the mid-high rounds. Murphy gone (what a crying shame, good kid) and the Walker situation sort of makes that an obvious need. Sinorice Moss? Or even more likely, Demetrius Williams? and finally, please sign Woodson Dammitt. Overrated? Too expensive? Who cares? He is an improvement, and the Packers could really use him. They have the money, so why not? Give him a huge contract, which is totally front-loaded cap-wise. I mean why not? They need to get this done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I don't see the Packers drafting a QB in round 1 regardless of Favre's status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 The packers are staging it as if they would really want to take a QB at #5. 1434280[/snapback] What? I've never heard anyone even suggest the Packers were looking at a QB... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 What? I've never heard anyone even suggest the Packers were looking at a QB... 1434288[/snapback] I have. Ted Thompson made the Sam Bowie/Michael Jordan referrence about a week ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 What? I've never heard anyone even suggest the Packers were looking at a QB... 1434288[/snapback] I have. Ted Thompson made the Sam Bowie/Michael Jordan referrence about a week ago. 1434293[/snapback] 'best Player' Theory Ted Thompson Says Brett Favre's Indecision Won't Alter The Packers' Draft Plans. Wisconsin State Journal :: SPORTS :: B1 Wednesday, April 12, 2006 JASON WILDE jwilde@madison.com 608-252-6176 Ted Thompson is done trying to figure out when Brett Favre might have an answer for him regarding his future. "I've gotten to the point where I'm not trying to predict that anymore," the Green Bay Packers general manager said of Favre's impending decision on whether to retire or return for his 16th NFL season. "Every day we do the best we can to make the Packers better. That's all we can do." Thus, Thompson said he wasn't all verklempt when Favre didn't make any announcement about his future at last Saturday morning's news conference in Tunica, Miss. "I don't think he planned to make some sort of announcement and then decided not to," Thompson said. Edelweiss The next faux deadline for Favre to qualify for his $3 million roster bonus is Saturday, although the bonus isn't payable until September and the Packers don't have to pay it if Favre retires. The date has already been pushed back three times. And at least publicly, Thompson claims that he's not letting the possibility that Favre won't have given him an answer by the time the NFL draft begins on April 29 bother him, either. In fact, Thompson said that he won't let Favre's indecision affect what he does with the No. 5 overall pick when the Packers are on the clock 17 days from now. While one cannot discount the likelihood that he may have just been posturing for the benefit of potential trade suitors, Thompson sounded pretty committed to the idea of taking the proverbial "best player available" -- even if it's a quarterback. Even though Thompson hates hypotheticals, he responded to this one: Favre hasn't made up his mind by draft day, and Texas quarterback Vince Young is still on the board at No. 5. With last year's first-round pick, Aaron Rodgers (No. 24 overall) on the roster and the possibility still there that Favre could come back, would he really take Young? Yes he would, Thompson said -- if he decided Young was the right player. After all, remember the parallel Thompson has drawn twice now -- once at the NFL scouting combine, and once after watching Young's on-campus workout along with coach Mike McCarthy on March 22 in Austin -- about passing on Young being like the Portland Trail Blazers passing on a certain basketball legend in the 1984 NBA draft because they needed a big man, not a guard-forward. "I'll go back to the Sam Bowie situation," Thompson said after Young's workout. "If you have a chance to get Michael Jordan, you get Michael Jordan." Thompson disagreed with Favre's assertion that the quarterback will be "long gone" before the first-round pick makes an impact, saying he thought the Packers would get an impact player at No. 5. But Thompson vowed that whomever the Packers take at No. 5, the selection would be made independent of Favre's situation. "We always look at the draft with a long-term view. You draft not based on who's going to line up in the minicamp, you draft based on how you want to see your team over the next several years," Thompson said. "Which is why you take the best player available. And that's what we'll do." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Super Twinky, Nice work, but a little far fetched. It's Ted Thompson running the Pack, not Tom Clancy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I don't believe TT is even considering taking a QB at #5, either, but Twinky here has a point. There has been rumors for a long time now that Favre has already told the front office that he'll be back... If anything, it would give Green Bay just a little more leverage with possible trade partners. If a few teams coveting Young or Leinart really believe the Packers are about to draft him, they'll be more willing to make a deal happen. On the other hand, if Favre had already announced that he'd be back for another season, NO TEAM would ever seriously believe Thompson when he told them he might take a QB. This "theory" is unlikely to be 100% true, but there could be SOME truth to it. Maybe Favre told Thompson and McCarthy a month ago that he's strongly leaning toward returning. Then Thompson told Favre, "Hey, man -- take your time. Once you've made up your mind 100%, do the team a favor and hold off on the announcement until after the draft. Your playing status could help us in trade negotiations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecerwin Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I have. Ted Thompson made the Sam Bowie/Michael Jordan referrence about a week ago. 1434293[/snapback] Go Blazers! I think your theory is crazy talk. I don't see how it gives the Packers an edge here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Twinky Posted April 24, 2006 Author Share Posted April 24, 2006 Go Blazers! I think your theory is crazy talk. I don't see how it gives the Packers an edge here. 1434314[/snapback] If Farve actually retired and Rodgers really sucks, we would take a QB at #5. If other teams (Oakland for example?) that have a need at QB see their pick of need being taken, they will want to trade up. Let's make a deal! a little far fetched. It's Ted Thompson running the Pack, not Tom Clancy. 1434311[/snapback] A little bit of crazy talk backed up with some truth, and hmmm...you never know for sure until it happens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebdog Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 how does Favre's decision play into whether GB might draft a QB anyway? he's stated if he comes back that this is his last year. no one drafting Young, Leinhart, or Cutler is going to expect much if anything from them this year regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Go Blazers! I think your theory is crazy talk. I don't see how it gives the Packers an edge here. 1434314[/snapback] It's not my theory, in fact I don't even care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 how does Favre's decision play into whether GB might draft a QB anyway? he's stated if he comes back that this is his last year. no one drafting Young, Leinhart, or Cutler is going to expect much if anything from them this year regardless. 1434347[/snapback] agree. don't see how it plays much of a role. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I hate Rodgers and think they should draft a QB regardless...lol...even though they won't.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLIND HOMER Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 1434381[/snapback] :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFreak Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Yea, I also heard that Javon Walker has already agreed on an extension but they are keeping it hush hush. Rumor has it that he and Favre were camping together recently and they worked it all out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Yea, I also heard that Javon Walker has already agreed on an extension but they are keeping it hush hush. Rumor has it that he and Favre were camping together recently and they worked it all out. 1434433[/snapback] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 There has been rumors for a long time now that Favre has already told the front office that he'll be back...1434312[/snapback] Swiss, I have not come across a single credible source backing this up. Now I have recently seen a ton of Favre apologists on various message boards speculating on it. Are those message board posts, the source of the rumors you're referring to? Or can you point me in the direction of a credible source? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedroz13 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Take your Favre-love goggles off. He is being a small thingie and holding the franchise hostage for selfish reasons. I do think he comes back for one more year, but I don't like the way he's going about it. And I don't believe for one second this is some Ted Thompson/ Brett Favre conspiracy to trick people on GB's draft. From what we've seen the last 15 years, the GB draft strategy doesn't really scare anyone (Mandarick over Barry Sanders and Deion? Aaron Rodgers???? Passing on Randy Moss?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Swiss, I have not come across a single credible source backing this up. Now I have recently seen a ton of Favre apologists on various message boards speculating on it. Are those message board posts, the source of the rumors you're referring to? Or can you point me in the direction of a credible source? 1434461[/snapback] I've been reading it on PFT for a month now. The NFL knows as well. Why else would they schedule so many primetime matchups for the Packers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budlitebrad Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 TT's gotta trade down and pile up some picks. I can't think of one position that we don't need to fill or upgrade, so why not make more room on the shopping list? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peteteacher2001 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Yea, I also heard that Javon Walker has already agreed on an extension but they are keeping it hush hush. Rumor has it that he and Favre were camping together recently and they worked it all out. 1434433[/snapback] And I hear it's being filmed for a special called "Broke Pack Mountain" I highly double Walker and Favre would even share the same parking lot next year. No way Walker is letting Brets interference last year be all forgiven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I've been reading it on PFT for a month now.1434621[/snapback] PFT is semi credible. They throw a lot of rumors out there and hit on about 25% of them. The NFL knows as well. Why else would they schedule so many primetime matchups for the Packers?1434621[/snapback] While Favre certainly helps Green Bay's popularity (especially if he makes it known this season is his farewell tour), Favre or no Favre, the Pack has a large national following. Always have, always will. Also look at their Prime Time opponents. Pack ~ vs ~ Eagles = Fans will watch this game, Favre or no Favre. Pack ~ vs ~ Seahawks = Hasselbeck connection + 2005 NFC Superbowl representative. Fans will watch this game, Favre or no Favre. Pack ~ vs ~ Vikings = Long established Inter Division rivalry. Fans will watch this game, Favre or no Favre. Not sure the NFL schedule confirms a Top Secret agreement by Favre to play this year. You'd also have sooo many people knowing, word would have leaked by now. Again, any credible sources? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 PFT is semi credible. They throw a lot of rumors out there and hit on about 25% of them. While Favre certainly helps Green Bay's popularity (especially if he makes it known this season is his farewell tour), Favre or no Favre, the Pack has a large national following. Always have, always will. Also look at their Prime Time opponents. Pack ~ vs ~ Eagles = Fans will watch this game, Favre or no Favre. Pack ~ vs ~ Seahawks = Hasselbeck connection + 2005 NFC Superbowl representative. Fans will watch this game, Favre or no Favre. Pack ~ vs ~ Vikings = Long established Inter Division rivalry. Fans will watch this game, Favre or no Favre. Not sure the NFL schedule confirms a Top Secret agreement by Favre to play this year. You'd also have sooo many people knowing, word would have leaked by now. 1434743[/snapback] PFT hits on a much higher %. I'd put it closer to 75%. The NFL could've scheduled primetime games for the Eagles and Seahawks for any of the remaining 15 weeks of the season, but they decided to do it when they were to play Favre and the Packers. There's a cheesy story line to the Hawks game with Favre and Holmgren. The Eagles will suck next year. Who wants to watch a Favre-less Packers team take on the Eagles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 PFT hits on a much higher %. I'd put it closer to 75%. 1434754[/snapback] You're dreaming. NO WAY they hit on 3 out of 4 of their rumors. If you read every single story thay have in their Rumor Mill section, it's 25%...maybe 30%. Still, nearly one out of three Rumors proving accurate, is pretty decent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.