1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Brett Favre: discussing all possibilities

Discussion in 'All Other Team Discussions' started by PackersRS, May 7, 2009.

  1. PackersRS
    Offline

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Location:
    Porto Alegre, Brazil
    Ratings:
    +979 / 0 / -0
    Okay, this is my last take in this already abused topic.
    I will present options for Favre with my wish and reaction in every one.

    Favre in the next days (or not) will do one of the following:

    - Stay retired.
    Doing this, things will stay the way they are. Some people will still resent him, some will resent TT. But it won't damage his status with the majority of packer fans.
    * Good choice, Mr. Favre. It shows that last year you were acting only by impulse, and that in those years with the Packers you were sincere.

    - Sign a one-day contract with the Green Bay Packers then retire.
    It would not only reestabilish any damaged image he might have, but also show that he was the better man in the argument all along, and that his love for the fans and the organizations are far greater than his hate towards TT.
    * YES, BRETT! DO IT! I BEG OF YOU!

    - Play for the queens.
    The worst possible action Brett Favre can do. It will not only infuriate the great majority of Packer fans, but also wreck his entire career playing in Green Bay and show that he's just a spoiled 10 year old brat.
    * For heaven's sake, Brett, what have you turn into? You're so stupid...

    - Play for some other team.
    The less likely to happen, it would show imaturity of his part, and prove that he is a spoiled brat. BUT his image as a HoF Green Bay Packer quarterback remains intact, and demonstrates that he has at least respect for the fans.
    * Mr. #4, if the "itch" strikes you again (Damn those southern mosquitos!), please go play for someone we don't absolutely despite. You can still play against us if you want to stick it to TT, that's no problem with the fans. But just don't do it wearing the hated uniforms...
  2. nelanator
    Offline

    nelanator Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Messages:
    142
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    A couple of beefs with the 1st and 2nd scenarios:

    Included in the first should be the option of staying retired for the first half of the summer and deciding to return once all of the mini-camps and OTAs that he has no interest in attending are finished.

    And the second one isn't an option at all because there is zero chance that the Packers have him take the field again. For that to happen the desire for Favre to play again needs to be reciprocal between both sides, but the Packers have been down this road with Favre and Rogers is their QB. I'm not sure that allowing Favre to return for one last harrah is of interest to him. The only really possible scenario that is even close to what you are saying is that he signs a one-day contract and retires officially as a Packer. A lot of HOFers that spent the bulk of their careers with one team and will always been identified with that team have chosen to go that route after playing their last couple of years with another team after they were washed up and their original teams didn't care to retain them any more. Jerry Rice comes to mind as an example with the 49ers. And Cris Carter may have done the same for Minnesota as well.
  3. PackersRS
    Offline

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Location:
    Porto Alegre, Brazil
    Ratings:
    +979 / 0 / -0
    That's what I've said. Play for one game and then retire... And that's my whish...
  4. YoKramer
    Offline

    YoKramer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    319
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0
    Would the Packers let him start that 1 game tho. Maybe take the first snap then hand the ball to Rodgers would be a better way to go.
  5. nelanator
    Offline

    nelanator Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Messages:
    142
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    No and no. Cutting ties with Favre in the first place was a testament to the fact that Brett Favre and his legacy was not bigger than the Green Bay Packers. Letting him suit up again just for the sake of it would mean that they would have to cut a guy to make room on the roster for just one day, it would be a slap in the face to Rogers, and it would say the exact oposite of what they said when they traded Favre last offseason.

    And I should have said in my previous post that the only scenario close to this is signing him to a one-day contract in the offseason. Then they don't have to worry about the roster size and it is a nice, quiet, and symbolic way to let him end his career officially as a Packer.

    Sorry guys, I just think that your notion of the Packers possibly allowing him to play agian for just one game and just for the sake of it is absolutely proposterous. Would help his legacy? Of course. But is it even feasible? Not at all.
  6. PackersRS
    Offline

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Location:
    Porto Alegre, Brazil
    Ratings:
    +979 / 0 / -0
    Sorry! I thought one thing and wrote another, then misunderstoon what nelanator was trying to say... Sorry.
    Yes, what I thought all along was SIGN with the Green Bay Packers for one day, not PLAY one game...
    But what YoKramer said isn't a bad idea. Have him suit up and throw a ball, much like when celebrities throw a first pitch in baseball. We don't see that in football. It's usually just a ceremony and the ex-player wearing a jersey. Some action would be nice, specially if it's a qb.
    But then again, nelanator does have a good point with the roster space. Slap in Rodgers face, I don't know about that, because it's implicit in the retiring of his jersey, that both parts made amends...
  7. nelanator
    Offline

    nelanator Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Messages:
    142
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    No need to apologize on an internet message board, man. I could see something like you are saying being possible - where he signs a one-day contract in the offseason and then comes back at some point during the season (though I don't think that he would have to be under contract) and puts on the green and gold again for a pre-game ceremony. Excuse the fact that this post is about as long as "War & Peace", but I hope people will find it to be worth reading in its entirety.

    The roster space thing is a huge obstacle if any contract is going to happen during the season. None of the options for players that Favre would replace are very good ones for a football team that is trying to put a winning team on the field because in any case they are losing one player on their roster just for one other player who will only be playing one play - a QB handing it off. Obviously, that is going to be, at least to some degree, detrimental to the team's chances of winning the game even though a bottom-feeder on the depth chart will not play much. Nevertheless, the Packers have stated time and time again regarding Favre that they are simply out to put the best product on the field that they can.

    I break down their options like this, none of them close to perfect and none of them actually good for the reason listed above:

    a) If you don't have anyone on the roster that you want to risk losing, you'll have to work out an agreement (basically an extension) beforehand with a guy and be sure that he won't sign elsewhere over the course of that day and understands what is going on. But still there is never any certainty here and you'll probably have to overpay him. Not a great option by any means.

    b) A solid player who will be injured and out for the next game anyway, and you want to extend anyway, would be ideal for option A because they probably wouldn't want to extend a guy who is one of the bottom five players on the team, i.e. someone who doesn't see the field enough to warrant overpaying for. Still, this requires a lot of things to come together and is by no means likely to happen at any point during the season. And during that one day you could possibly lose a key player if his agent's phone explodes with contract offers during that day.

    c) An option that you would never want to have to bank on would be that a player gets injured, needs season-ending surgery, and you're going to put on IR. You put him on IR on Saturday, sign Favre for Sunday, and then sign someone else to replace the injured player (probably off the practice squad) for the remainder of the season. This is the cleanest, easiest, and most effective option, but it requires someone getting injured for the season so it is not a sure thing and kinda sucks at the same time - losing the player and all. Relatively speaking, this is the best scenario if you are looking to sign Favre because there is no future risk to the team in losing a player because that player is already lost and it had nothing to do with Favre.

    d) Putting a guy on waivers is an option, as opposed to cutting them, if you want to send a guy down to the practice squad and sign Favre in his place for a day. This probably means that that player would have to be one that you don't want on the roster anyway, and there would have to be another player in mind to replace him. The downfall of this, of course, is that any team can claim the player if he is put on waivers so you may lose him.

    e) There is a guy that you are going to cut anyway. This is almost as good as option C except for the fact that you will have to deal with the media backlash of it for the percieved firing of a guy just so you can sign another for one day and put Brett above the team after all. The intention isn't that, and the player can know that it isn't true, but there will inevitably be some bad PR and undue sympathy for the guy who got cut (ultimately unjustly making the team look bad). They'll get over it and the Favre memory will last longer from a fan's standpoint, but this is the kind of thing where 10 years later Sports Illustrated writes a feature on the guy who's "career was ended" so that Favre could play one more game for the Pack. It's BS but it sells magazines.

    f) Rogers goes on IR and if Favre's bicep is good to go he could possibly play more than one play but maybe even the rest of the season! But he would have to learn the playbook first, would have to want to come back and play for Green Bay, and the Packers would have to be willing to take him back. In other words, the Pacific Ocean needs to go under the bridge. If this happens, we should all go and buy a Powerball ticket and stay the heck inside next time there is a lightning storm.

    All of this, however, is contingent on 2 things - neither of which I am confident are true or would happen:

    1) Favre doesn't hate the Packers like multiple reports have suggested and would actually care to go through all this.

    2) The Packers are willing to forego their previous stance of not putting Favre and his legacy on a pedestal, and are even willing to put their differences aside.

    In the end, this whole discussion of Favre actually seeing the field in a real game for the Packers again is a fairy tale for Packer fans that, while possible, is extremely unlikely.
  8. croxeye
    Offline

    croxeye Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    behind you with my shank out
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Honestly, I just want him to sign a 1day tender with the packers and then retire a packer (like bill schroeder :))
  9. wingrider47
    Offline

    wingrider47 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    5
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    My Take

    I believe Teddy found a way to trick Brett into retiring somehow, whether it was helping him see it was his time to go or it would be on his own terms or whatever and now Brett hates the guy because of it. I mean Teddy is no dummy and knew as long as Brett was there his big draft pick boy Rogers was never seeing the field so he had to figure out a way to get Brett out of there and you know he couldn't just release him! There is more to this story that we fans don't know about.

    I say who cares if Brett plays! The bottom line is the Packers didn't want him so I don't know how the Packer organization, team or fans can be mad at Brett for playing with any team, be it the Vikings or whoever! If there is a team that will pay him then go ahead and play him. Teddy got what he wanted so now us fans need to deal with it!!

Share This Page