ESPN says......

[packerfan1245]

I saw it on TV. John Clayton reports a possbliy Favre could play beyond 2007. Any1 else see this?

 

[tromadz]

Mr Mackey is wrong sometimes, we will all find out within a couple weeks supposedly. Exciting times.

 

[longtimefan]

I saw something wher ehe just reported he THINKS Brett COULD play past 2007..

Thats like you saying Brett can play till 2010

 

[Hammer]

I saw that too. It's based on the fact that he is postponing his ankle surgery.

 

[agopackgo4]

Favre can physically play that long im sure. But there aint no way in hell he is sticking around that long.

 

[packedhouse01]

My hope is that if he decides to play that he says I'm going to play one more year or I'm going to play two more years and then I'm going to call it quits.

 

[cheesey]

I think he can play till the year 2057.........of course then instead of a jock he will be wearing "Depends!"LOLOL!!!
Would be great as an endorsement!
"Hi! I'm Brett Favre! And when i get tackled by a 400 pound defensive lineman, it's sure nice to have something soft to land on! DEPENDS!" :thumbsup:

 

[Packersfan43084]

I'd love for the Pack win the Super Bowl next year. This way, Brett could out on top, ala Elway.

 

[vikesrule]

I'd love for the Pack win the Super Bowl next year. This way, Brett could out on top, ala Elway.

:rotflmao:

:rotflmao:

:rotflmao:

:rotflmao:

 

[Cory]

I'd love for the Pack win the Super Bowl next year. This way, Brett could out on top, ala Elway.

:rotflmao:

:rotflmao:

:rotflmao:

:rotflmao:

Unrealistic probably, but they are close than the Vikes!

 

[vikesrule]

Unrealistic probably, but they are close than the Vikes!

Not when Favre retires.
In the last two years, the Pack has been 12-20...with Favre.
This year without him, well, hello basement.

 

[porky88]

Unrealistic probably, but they are close than the Vikes!

Not when Favre retires.
In the last two years, the Pack has been 12-20...with Favre.
This year without him, well, hello basement.

Green Bay looks to be in better shape than the Vikings and Lions especially considering Brad Childress rather force players to fit his scheme instead of work with what he's got. Not to mention he rans the zone blocking scheme (or tried to) with 330 pound lineman. The Lions are always a diaster. I think the foundation is much brighter in Green Bay than Minnesota and/or Detriot. However Chicago is setup to win this divsioin for the next 2 years IMO as long as they get back to what they do best.

 

[Cal2GreenBay]

ESPN also said the Packers would pick Marshawn Lynch at Runningback

 

[cheesey]

Unrealistic probably, but they are close than the Vikes!

Not when Favre retires.
In the last two years, the Pack has been 12-20...with Favre.
This year without him, well, hello basement.

Hello basement? You must be talking to the Lions.
Hey.....seeing as you are much closer, you go ahead and say "Hello!" instead, ok??? :thumbsup:

 

[Zero2Cool]

I saw that too. It's based on the fact that he is postponing his ankle surgery.

How does not having surgery make his career longer? Brett said his ankle surgery will have no effect on his decision to play or to retire. He also said he's had similar surgery before during the off season.

 

[longtimefan]

I saw that too. It's based on the fact that he is postponing his ankle surgery.

How does not having surgery make his career longer? Brett said his ankle surgery will have no effect on his decision to play or to retire. He also said he's had similar surgery before during the off season.

They prob figured since he has postponed it many times before and came back, this is just like those other times

 

[net]

To VikesRule: I wouldn't be to quick to drop the Packers to the bottom. But I would be concerned that the tens of millions of dollars Deranged Red and the latest owners have spent in free agency has netted them next to nothing.

Are you pining for the good old days of Mike Tice?

Sharper and Longwell: Best wishes.

Childress: luckiest break in Green Bay history he missed the plane.

At this point, as much as I've complained about what has happened in the past two years, I think with or without Favre the Packers are ahead of your team. Favre was an above average QB this year...based on the best QB's in the league like Brady...but he's clearly ahead of the Vikings QB's..
With Rodgers, it will be a learning curve, but he's ready to take over.

The Vikings have a bunch of overpaid underperformers who have never, and will never, gel as a unit to play good football. It's a great lesson to all who drool about spending outlandish money in free agency to 'buy' a championship.

With or without Favre the Packers are above the Vikings next year.

 

[Since69]

Brett Favre will play in 2007, 2008 and 2009 at least. Maybe well 2010 as well, but only if McDonalds promises to never re-release the McRib sandwich.

 

[Since69]

Hey!! I just read on the internet that Brett's going to play until 2010, unless McDonalds starts making McRibs again.

And I believe everything I read. It was on the internet, so you know it must be true...

 

[digsthepack]

If I had to pick, I figure Marshawn Lynch, or Dwayne Jarrett are chosen at 16.

Beyond that, we ar light years ahead of the Queens with the youngest, yet also talented, roster in the league, and plenty of cash to make a splash with select FAs while also re-signing our own. If Favre commits to 2 more years, we have another great draft with some instant impact on the field, and acquire select FAs to push us over the top within the division, we could make a push in 2008.

The Bears defense has peaked and will now be picked apart in FA......their offense is their offense; the Kitties will always be mired at the bottom as long as Millen is there; and the Queens are historically the most dysfunctional and under-performing team in the league....regardless of what they spend and whom the bring in.

I like the looks of our team, with or without #4, in 2008.

 

[Zero2Cool]

I saw that too. It's based on the fact that he is postponing his ankle surgery.

How does not having surgery make his career longer? Brett said his ankle surgery will have no effect on his decision to play or to retire. He also said he's had similar surgery before during the off season.

They prob figured since he has postponed it many times before and came back, this is just like those other times

Okay, but Brett said the surgery will not effect his retiring or continuing to play. :shrug:

 

[longtimefan]

I saw that too. It's based on the fact that he is postponing his ankle surgery.

How does not having surgery make his career longer? Brett said his ankle surgery will have no effect on his decision to play or to retire. He also said he's had similar surgery before during the off season.

They prob figured since he has postponed it many times before and came back, this is just like those other times

Okay, but Brett said the surgery will not effect his retiring or continuing to play. :shrug:

We are talking about ESPN here...they are just grapsing at straws, trying to make a story out of nothing.

 

[CalifPacker]

Unrealistic probably, but they are close than the Vikes!

Not when Favre retires.
In the last two years, the Pack has been 12-20...with Favre.
This year without him, well, hello basement.

I believe that is reserved for the Detroit Lions.

 

[warhawk]

We will be putting essentially our whole team with a few upgrades back on the field next year while the Vikes reload again. Like they always do.

The have a lot of money AS LONG AS they don't resign a bunch of guys. They constantly look to replace 5 or 6 guys on either side of the ball searching for something that works and get no chemistry what so ever.

We have fewer existing players(like Jenkins) to address than most teams and if, in fact, Brett calls it quits the added $9mil will give us more money to work with than any team in the NFL.

We all knew that when Brett called it quits we better get better overall teamwise and we are in a great position to do exactly that if it were to happen now. You can't ask for much more than that.

 

[flapackfan]

I saw it on TV. John Clayton reports a possbliy Favre could play beyond 2007. Any1 else see this?

Is he that same idiot that said Favre should go to the Raiders and play 2 or 3 more years??? I cant remember the name of the ESPN idiot said that but i was watching that and was like, wtf???

Why would Favre go to the worst team in football?? His only reason to come back is to win. Only Jesus Christ could get that team above .500 next year. Bad offensive line, unmotivated cancerous receivers, nothing special at runningback and only slightly above average defense. Favre's consecutive games streak would end by week 5 next year with that shyt offensive line.