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!

Great Read - Packers Should Do Whatever Brett Tells Them

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by dd80forever, Jul 9, 2008.

  1. dd80forever

    dd80forever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    223
    Ratings:
    +0
    http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/...etwork&page=nfl/news/newstest.aspx?id=4162892



    By Tony Moss, NFL Editor

    Philadelphia, PA (Sports Network) - This has to be a joke, right?

    The reports that the Green Bay Packers brain trust of general manager Ted Thompson and head coach Mike McCarthy are not interested in scratching Brett Favre's "itch to play" in 2008 is not funny-ha-ha, though it is funny-weird.

    The Packers haven't said anything officially yet (nor has Favre, for that matter), but the whispers suggesting the team would prefer to move on without the certain Hall-of-Famer are clear and audible.

    And that makes no sense.

    This is being played up in some circles as another matchup between a player who doesn't know how to hang up the spikes and a team, though appreciative of his past efforts, that would like to put its aging star out to pasture.

    Sports Illustrated, in a piece about would-be successor Aaron Rodgers that ran last week, compared Favre by association with the likes of Johnny Unitas, Joe Namath, and John Elway, among others.

    If Favre's skills had eroded toward the end of his career like all three of the players above (including Elway, who did a lot of handing off to Terrell Davis during those two Super Bowl years), the comparison would be apt. The Packers' seeming standoffish attitude would be, too.

    But the simple fact of the matter is that Favre can still play, as evidenced by his Pro Bowl campaign of 2007. Even at the age of 38, Favre threw for 4,155 yards with 28 touchdowns and 15 interceptions. Favre's 66.5 completion percentage was the highest of his career, the 95.7 passer rating his best since 1996. Oh, and Green Bay went 13-3 in '07, won the NFC North, and was a break away from playing for a Super Bowl title.

    From an on-field standpoint, the only possible mark the Packers can hold against Favre is his middling performance against the Giants in the NFC Championship, but given the elements that night, anyone other than talk radio blowhards should be willing to show some leniency.

    Off the field, there are suggestions that Thompson, McCarthy, and company are less-than-enamored with Favre's annual indecisiveness when it comes to returning or retiring, an approach that held the Packers hostage for part of each of the past two offseasons. The organization has apparently reached its breaking point in respect to reinforcing Favre's wavering ways.

    That frustration on the part of the Packers is more than understandable. At the same time, Thompson and McCarthy need to wake up and get over it.

    No disrespect to Rodgers, who might develop into a fine quarterback someday, but Green Bay's chances at sniffing the Super Bowl drop drastically with him at the helm. Expecting a player who has thrown 59 career NFL passes to be consistent over his first season as a starter is a scenario straight out of dreamland.

    That Thompson and McCarthy would expect the team to be as good with Rodgers as it was with Favre is an assumption that smacks of hubris. It shows that Thompson wants to show the world how great he is at putting together a roster, and that McCarthy thinks his offensive scheme is so brilliant that anyone can run it.

    Sure, both men have spent considerable hours, since being hired midway through the current decade, in planning for life after Favre. As professionals, both are undoubtedly eager to see that plan executed. At the same time, both are failing miserably at seeing the forest for the trees.

    If Green Bay, with a talented young roster that looks highly capable of making a Super Bowl run this season, fails to meet expectations with Rodgers at the controls and Favre no longer a member of the club, Thompson and McCarthy had better deploy interns to start their cars every day. Packers fans are going to be so hot, those blocks of cheese on their heads are going to turn to Whiz.

    The world will always wonder how good the team might have been if Thompson and McCarthy had made what seems to most of the world to be the natural move, welcoming Favre back with open arms.

    You have to believe a healthy number of players on the 2008 Packers will begin wondering the same if things begin to go south, a situation that will not help the standing of Thompson, McCarthy, or Rodgers within the locker room.

    The risk in allowing Favre to return as the starter is far less than it is in rebuffing his efforts to come back.

    The chance at a reward, i.e. Rodgers leading Green Bay to a Super Bowl title in year one, is one of Powerball-like proportions.

    The issue is not about disgracing a legend, it's about giving yourself the best possible chance to win.

    Or, in the case of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy, it could be about blowing that chance.
     
  2. Raider Pride

    Raider Pride Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,868
    Ratings:
    +2
    For every action... There is a reaction.

    I just think the Packers head office is just tired of the games he has been playing the last three off seasons.

    It is like a kid, who will not go to sleep without crying for attention. eventually, as a parent, you just shut the door, and ignore the crying until they cry them self to sleep. Or retire for the evening.

    If Brett did not play this freaking game every off season this would not be an issue for T.T. and the organization.

    Brett brought this on himself. No one can tell me other wise in my mind.
     
  3. dd80forever

    dd80forever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    223
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yep, because he debated Retirement, god forbid anyone ever do that.
     
  4. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Is that from The Onion?
     
  5. Raider Pride

    Raider Pride Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,868
    Ratings:
    +2

    Brett is not working at AT&T and messing with AT&T here by contemplating retirement. This is an NFL Team that has to have a five year plan.
     
  6. dd80forever

    dd80forever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    223
    Ratings:
    +0
    And has to be able to deviate from that plan at any time.
     
  7. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Yeah they should be able to get mulligans on contracts and roster moves.

    "Excuse me, Mr. Goodell. Our hall of fame QB who retired decided to come back. Can we get re-dos on everything we did the last four months?"
     
  8. dd80forever

    dd80forever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    223
    Ratings:
    +0
    Contracts? To Whom? What Player was signed because of Brett?

    What Roster move was Made?
     
  9. Heatherthepackgirl

    Heatherthepackgirl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,274
    Ratings:
    +0

    Retiring is a "big" decision especially if you love what you do for a living, this is all Brett has done, he wanted to make the right choice for seasons upon seasons, I for one didnt mind at all waiting for his decision.

    Now all of a sudden he may have changed his mind, and that is a criminal offense? All he wants is to play football, its all he knows and all he enjoys doing so I say let the guy play why not?

    We keep going back and forth on this board, but the bottom line is non of us will have a say at the end, what will happen will happen we just have to wait it out like everyone else, soon we will all know. I for one will be behind Favre if he comes back, I would hate to see him play for another team. I just dont feel he would do that but you never know if he still wants to play.

    Favre has given us so much as fans over the years I hate when people talk smack about him. Our QB or not we should respect him and respect the decision the Packers Organization will make.
     
  10. Stroz

    Stroz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Messages:
    33
    Ratings:
    +0
    You're right. They likely would have had Brohm no matter what. The other guy, he is expandable. :lol:

    Such as life!
     
  11. de_real_deal

    de_real_deal Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    591
    Ratings:
    +0
    Roster moves? Did they spend 60 million bringing in a F/A quarterback? Did they trade up in the draft and get Matt Ryan? Did they spend all their cap space on free agents to surround A-Rod? No, no and no would be the answers to those questions. This offseason has been about as quiet as could possibly be. We have plenty of cap space which will go unused anyway. Only reason not to bring brett favre in would be so that some upper management people can keep that 12.4 million in their pockets. God forbid we might have to let go of our 4th string quarterback or put him on the practice squad. Who cares. The last thing anyone wants to see is Matt Flynn suit up on Sunday so just "shut your mouth and get on board"
     
  12. Tiger

    Tiger Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,090
    Ratings:
    +0
    Damn straight! its a well known fact that TT keeps all the freed up cap money to fund his lavish lifestyle of excess. :roll:
     
  13. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    yeah I keep forgetting that if Favre didn't retire we woulda drafted 2 QBs. Right.

    "It's just some stupid late pick. Stop being dramatic" you might say. Well...Thompson is known for picking late round gold....and it might have been wasted.
     
  14. dd80forever

    dd80forever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    223
    Ratings:
    +0
    LOL, Boy judging from this quote straight from Ted, it seems he picks the best player available.


    From his pre draft press conference............

    "(I'll get this out of the way ... are you going to take the best player available?)
    Yeah, yeah. We try to. Now, it might not be the best available player in everyone's eyes, but we'll try to stick to that. We always think that's the best way to go. But oftentimes, it works itself out. The bad thing is we're picking at 30. The good thing is we're picking at 30. That way, 29 other teams have to make some decision for us, and that makes our decision easier."


     
  15. dd80forever

    dd80forever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    223
    Ratings:
    +0

    Thompson's previous 7th round Picks that = Gold

    Dave Tollefson
    Will Whitaker
    Kurt Campbell
    Clark Harris
    DeShawn Wynn


    Come to think of it I agree, that's not just gold, it golden.
     
  16. Packnic

    Packnic Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,454
    Ratings:
    +6

    New footage from Ted Thompson's supposed "vacation". He's really just swimming around in his silo of left over Packer salary cap.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    My thoughts exactly. Favre still has it. Rodgers WILL be good, but 1st year starters are 99% of the time bad.

    We are pretty close. We were a FG away from the SB last year. Favre still gives us the best chance to win.

    We do need Favre to make up his mind asap though. No more dragging things out. And if he plays, he should really say that this is really his last year. I don't want to lose Rodgers either, for as I said, he will be good.
     
  18. Since69

    Since69 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2005
    Messages:
    422
    Ratings:
    +1
    I keep hearing this argument, and repeatedly on NFL Radio on Sirius, and I can't see any strength in it. What would the Packers have done differently? Brohm was (apparently) the BPA at #56 - and Ted certainly hasn't ever shied away from drafting a player high at a position of strength. We probably wouldn't have taken Flynn in the 7th, but who's to say where his name was on TT's draft board?

    I refuse to believe that over the course of two OTAs MM has changed the gameplan or the playbook to any significant degree. Likewise, I refuse to believe that the rest of the team has irreversibly bonded with Rodgers. Indeed, PFT's Rumor Mill has an article about how many Packers are talking about getting "their QB" back.

    I agree with the crux of the article's argument: The positives seemingly outweigh the negatives by a large margin, and welcoming Brett back gives us a better chance at another title. And that's the name of the game for every GM in the league.
     
  19. Since69

    Since69 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2005
    Messages:
    422
    Ratings:
    +1
    Have you ever actually done this? Diving headfirst into a pile of gold coins?

    It hurts a lot more than the cartoons make it seem.

    (of course, there were only 4 coins in my "pile", but still...)
     
  20. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Agreed Heather.

    It would be one thing if some aging QB with a 70 rating wanted to come back, but Brett Favre was the MVP runner-up last year.
     
  21. NodakPaul

    NodakPaul Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    256
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think that in itself is a problem. It shows that there are some players in Fav-re's camp, and likely some in Rodger's camp. A divided locker room.
     
  22. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'll make it clear that I am NOT a college football expert. However, I have read what the scouts were saying and from what I read, Brohm had no business being as low as he did. He should have been a first round pick.

    the other thing I read was Flynn was supposed to be a 5th round pick. Did TT draft BPA? I don't know, but I'm thinking he did in both cases.

    Now as for the team - Donald Driver and Brett Favre are brothers. He knows everyone on O except for Jordy, who Aaron knows for only a few months longer than Brett. So the whole Favre is out of touch is a weak argument (I'm agreeing with you, Since, not arguing).

    As a Favre fan, but a Packer fan first, Brett still gives us the best chance to win, but if he doesn't come back, I'm in Aaron's corner 100%. I want us to win an SB this year. That's what I want.
     
  23. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    I believe what other moves we might have made or whatever is flying around the real problems that exist with this whole deal the way it is coming down.

    You have a QB that leads 53 guys and touches the ball EVERY offensive play of every game.

    For three years now ours has talked about retiring. Then he did. OK then, time now to get our heads (says 53 guys) into the new guy and move on.
    They begin to do that and start rallying around ARod.

    But wait! Now we find out Brett's decided he made a mistake and wants back in. Ok then, now who is behind this move and who is going to have a hard time going back and forth, back and forth?

    Don't think for one moment that getting Brett back just puts the better QB for now back on the field. Anyone feeling this way is very, very naive. There WILL BE a fractured, or, at least a disjointed lockerroom resulting from this. No matter which way it turns out now.

    And I will tell you this as well. If the beginning of the season does not go as fortunately for us this year as it did last year and we lose a couple games we shouldn't......wufta!

    This coming season could become a nightmare of huge proportions very quickly. Unfortunately for everybody involved from Favre to Thompson, to Rodgers to McCarthy, to the players, to the fans, it DOESN"T MATTER who the starting QB is at this point, if we don't win and win a lot early, this is going to be bad.

    If Favre never retires and comes back and we look a little ragged, maybe start out two and two, no biggie. We come out now with Favre, go two and two and look ragged doing it. Oh, oh.

    Anyone that doesn't see the pressure this whole deal creates for this team in terms of HAVING TO WIN these first games coming out of the blocks is in la-la land.

    THAT, my friends, is the problem with how this deal is coming down.
     
  24. de_real_deal

    de_real_deal Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    591
    Ratings:
    +0
    how many qb's play at one time? Answer: one
     
  25. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    These are professionals. They should know that winning is the only thing that matters. I do not think the locker room will be chaotic and I'm not being naive about it either. MM needs to get them to understand that if Favre comes back, it's because he gives them the best chance to win.

    The other thing MM needs to do is get Aaron Rodgers some snaps. If I see Brett Favre in with 5 minutes remaining and we're up by 2 TDs, I'm going to be pissed.
     

Share This Page