Forum: foot
Page 5093
Subject: Favre retires

  Posted by: sarge33rd - [99331714] Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 10:17
After 17 years, Favre retires

A colorful and productive career comes to an end on an appropriate "high note"
 
1Seattle Zen
      ID: 44122722
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 10:22 		an appropriate "high note"

Absolutely. As Vikings fans, the "high note" was his last pass cost the Packers their chance of going to the Super Bowl - he forced a ill-advised throw right into the Giant defender's hands.

Enjoy your Wranglers, Brett.
 
2Perm Dude
      ID: 4621449
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 10:38 		Yeah, went out on a nice nigh note. Great job.

At one time I found a list of QBs who backed him up--a long sad sack list of could've-beens.
 
3sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 10:41 		As another longtime Vikings fan(atic), I learned to dread the Minn-GB games. However, I was sort referring to this past GB season as the high note, when Favre got GB to the NFC Title game. A spot, at seasons beginning, NOBODY thought they could achieve.

Did he make more than a few ill-advised throws throughout is career? Absolutely and even his most resolute fans dont deny it. Some of those throws though, turned into some of the games most incredible high-lights. He was a gunslinger, and he lived or died by that style of play. Simple truth is, he lived more than he died.
 
4barilko6
      ID: 561222714
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 10:58 		This is very surprising. I know every year lately we talk about if he will or won't retire, and that was getting pretty old. But this offseason I didn't hear any of the talk at all, and after last season's success, with a younger team, I thought for sure he would come back.

Maybe he realized nobody was talking about him and decided to drum up some action, only to recant in about a month or two?
 
5Great One
      ID: 27154129
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 11:07 		Since that thing went up a week ago on the Packers website... did somebody get the insider info then and inadvertantly spill the beans?
 
6Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 11:18 		SZ...a Vikings Fan? Figures.

Regardless, he is, was, and will always be one of the greats ever to put on a NFL uniform. Sarge, your post pretty much outlines my sentiments about the ole' gunslinger.

I cant help but think that the NFL Championship in the sub-zero temperature combined with toll (mentally and physically) it took on his body, influenced his decision.

Now we see if Aaron Rodgers is the real deal or not...
 
7Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 11:29 		Of course I'm razzing Favre here, he is one of the all-time greats. Back in the 90's, Favre had a terrible record in the Metrodome even as the Packers had their best teams of his career, but on the whole, he beat the Vikes more than they beat him.

He choose wisely to get out. He had a great year when no one expected it and he owns just about every NFL career passing record. It was the equivalent of Willie Mays in contention for the NL MVP as a member of the Mets, unbelievable.
 
8Mark L
      ID: 25155512
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 12:04 		Not a happy day here in Wisconsin. This fall I will no longer be able to tell my daughter (a freshman in HS) that the Packers have had only one starting QB in her lifetime.

There's lots of stuff flying around at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel website attributed to his brother and his agent that he wanted to come back but Ted Thompson did not exactly encourage him. No idea how much truth there is to it.

Packer fans really have no idea how lucky we have been.

PD 2: there are some sorry names on that list, like Henry Burris and TJ Rubley, but it also includes Mark Brunell, Matt Hasselbeck and Aaron Brooks, as well as Ty Detmer.
 
9Great One
      ID: 27154129
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 12:20 		Aaron Rodgers mustache rules. Hopefully we get some great pictures of that now.
 
10Boxman
      ID: 337352111
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 13:06 		Now that he's retired I gotta find this out from some of you.

If you could have a QB to win you one game, who do you pick?

If you could have a QB for a season, who do you pick?

Assume each QB would be in their prime.

Where I'm going here is that I'm not sure I'd pick Favre for either of those. Favre is a great QB, a first ballot HOF'er, and statistically probably the greatest QB ever. Yet I don't think I pick him for a game or a season in his prime when I look at the other names out there.
 
11sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 13:17 		In his prime? Montana would be my choice with Elway/Marino right behind and in no specific order.
 
12Great One
      ID: 27154129
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 13:20 		Montana and Elway in the same sentence reminds me of Montana NOT in his prime... playing for KC... and playing in that incredible KC vs DEN Monday Night game. In his old age Montana was still better than half the guys in the league now!
 
13sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 13:23 		Yeah GO, I rank Montana as THE best ever to play QB. *shrug* Terribly subjective, given that I was too young to remember Unitas and the game was entirely different then too.
 
14Boxman
      ID: 337352111
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 13:29 		I'm right there with you guys on Montana. He's certainly my QB for a game and it would be hard to rule him out for a season. Maybe Elway for a season, but maybe not.

That KC/DEN MNF game was legendary; one of the greatest regular season contests ever.
 
15leggestand
      Leader
      ID: 451036518
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 13:50 		***Disclaimer...like Sarge, my thoughts are extremely subjective given my limited exposure to football pre-1980.***

That is a tough question to answer because it hinges on so many things (i.e. o-line, running game, defense, WR's, etc). For example, if:

a. my team has a plethora of quick WR's where short reads are the way to succeed, I probably take Brady.

b. my team is running a west coast offense that only uses 5 blockers each play (meaning I need a QB who can run), I probably take Steve Young.

c. my team is a well balanced offense that runs the ball 50% of the time and passes the ball 50% of the time, I probably take Elway.

d. my team has a weak defense and I need to put up 30-40 points per game to have a chance to win, I probably take Favre.

e. my team has a strong defense and just need to limit mistakes on offense to win, I probably take Montana.

f. my team has strong WR's in terms of mixing together short and deep threats as well as a good offensive line, I probably take Marino.

It's a good question, but a tough one to ask. My team is the Steelers, and I have to imagine I'd take a guy that fits into the Steelers mantra and offensive style. I don't think a guy like Brady could succeed as much as a Montana a Steelers style offense, but I also don't think Montana could succeed as much as Brady in the Patriots style offense.
 
17leggestand
      Leader
      ID: 451036518
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 16:56 		As much as I hate to admit it, I mentioned Brady...so don't say "nobody!!!"
 
18Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 17:02 		::self edits thread:: Sorry legge :)

Why isn't Tom Brady getting more love? If there's a guy who I want to pick for a game, season, or even the playoffs...I'd want Brady behind center.

I mean if it wasn't for Tyree's AMAZING/MIRACLE/GREATEST...CATCH...EVER (given the circumstances) reception, we're talking about how Tom Brady, again, drove his troops down for a win in another big game en route to a co-MVP with Welker.
 
19sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 17:04 		Brady hasnt done it for long enough to be named alongside Elway, Marino, Montana, Favre. Hasnt he really "done it", about as long as Warner "did it"?
 
20Perm Dude
      ID: 4621449
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 17:07 		Nah. We'd be talking about how the Pats are still under investigation for cheating. At least the Giants put aside the question of another tainted championship.

Brady's good, no doubt about it. But Favre, as good as he was 17 years into the game, is the story. Will Brady in 9 years be as good as Favre was last year? Marino wasn't. Elway and Montana didn't make it. Tarkenton certainly was (his last year, his 18th, was his best ever).

pd
 
21leggestand
      Leader
      ID: 451036518
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 17:15 		That's a great point, PD, and kind of shows the opposite view of the questions posed by Boxman in post 10...

If you had a QB on the last legs of his career for a game or season, who would it be? I think you have to say Favre based on his last and 17th season, hands down.
 
22Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Tue, Mar 04, 2008, 17:16 		When it's all said and done, I suspect we will be talking about "Tom Brady or Peyton Manning", with the rest of them being "the rest".
 
23Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Wed, Mar 05, 2008, 01:01 		I read where Favre said he'd commit to multiple more years if the Pack could land Moss and they didn't pursue him. Then Moss re-signs with the Pats and Favre resigns.
 
24katietx
      ID: 201411622
      Wed, Mar 05, 2008, 14:05 		I'm in mourning.
 
25Texas Flood
      ID: 142267
      Fri, Mar 07, 2008, 00:03 		Thanks for the memories Bret, you were one of the great ones!

I guess you can be a great player without championships, but a
guy who has four never comes up in the discussion about the
greatest QB's of all time.

Terry Bradshaw never gets much love except from those of us who
grew up on Steeler football.
 
26Perm Dude
      ID: 22253156
      Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 19:12 		Packers tell fans they gave Favre to a nice farm family

An Onion classic!
 
27Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Mar 18, 2008, 08:35 		spam BUTT
 
28Myboyjack
      ID: 27210710
      Tue, Mar 18, 2008, 08:38 		spam BUTT

I useed to have a girl that worked for me that had spam butt; it was horrible.
 
29deepsnapper
      Leader
      ID: 017103420
      Fri, Jul 11, 2008, 14:16 		Is Brett's retirement final or is the 'itch" for real?

I'm curious if they've sawed his locker off the end of that row yet. No one's said anything about any remodeling in the locker room. (Maybe they're waiting for traing camp to start.) ;)

My question is will the NFL Channel talk about anything else for the next couple of weeks?
 
30Barilko6
      ID: 3051187
      Fri, Jul 11, 2008, 14:32 		Read post 4.
 
31Tree
      ID: 33611515
      Tue, Jul 15, 2008, 18:53 		Favre tempted to show up for Packers camp

Sorry, but Favre is turning into a real tool.
 
32TB
      ID: 395122110
      Tue, Jul 15, 2008, 23:37 		Part of me thinks that as well while the other part tells me that he is just having a hard time letting go. Football has been a part of his life for as long as he can remember. It puts the Packers in an odd position, but they surely are not intended victims. You'd have a hard time convincing me that Favre still isn't better than many team starters and that there isn't a place for him in this game anymore. I do think it would be pretty crazy if he ended up playing for the Bears this year.
 
33Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 00:13 		He's making $12M/year. If he shows up (after unretiring), the Packers would be obligated to pay him or trade him. They aren't going to cut him but no one would take him at that salary. SO it's pay your backup $12M or release him...or backpedal and start him again...
 
34TB
      ID: 395122110
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 03:04 		PR disaster if they trade or release him. If he wants to play, they just need to start him and watch him lead his team to the playoffs again.
 
35Tree
      ID: 1866165
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 06:10 		the point, TB, is that a team can't be held hostage by a player.

what Brett Favre is threatening to do is no different than, say, what TO did in Philly. he is causing a disruption, he is trying to prove there there is an "I" in team.

whether he is having a hard time letting go is irrelevant. he retired. the packers, after years of uncertainty, moved on.

then, he says "well. wait! maybe i *DO* want to play. and i'm going to force their hand!"

what he's doing, is an ass move.
 
36Perm Dude
      ID: 53622158
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 10:01 		Favre doesn't know what he wants, from what I've read. He's being very childish, IMO. When asked flat out what he wants, he can't say (because he doesn't know).

Here's a hint, Favre: Figure out what you want before you open you mouth.
 
37ChicagoTRS
      ID: 4110481415
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 10:42 		bleh...not a packer fan or favre fan but I put a lot of blame on the packers...if Favre wants back what is there to think about? why would he not be the starter instantly? competing for the job?!? please...what competition...PR disaster for the packers...

he was still pro bowl caliber last year...packers should just say welcome back lets try to win a championship...not sure why they are in such a hurry to move on...it is not like there comperable QBs waiting in the wings...likely they will never have another QB the caliber of favre again...
 
38Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 11:27 		if Favre wants back what is there to think about? why would he not be the starter instantly?

he stepped down. he left. he quit. is it fair to Aaron Rodgers and the rest of his teammates?

it's about the Packers, not about Favre, except for the fact that Favre is making it about Favre.

 
39ChicagoTRS
      ID: 4110481415
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 14:07 		Who gives the Packers a better chance to win a superbowl this year and next...Rodgers or Favre at QB?

I guess I just do not understand why this is such an issue for GB? Yes it is definitely inconvenient and not exactly fair that Favre retires and then wants to unretire...but he is still a pro bowl caliber QB and one of the best QBs of all time and the face of the GB franchise. Readjust your plans/future and field the best team now. I think the team has handled the sitation poorly and it is a PR disaster.

If they are done with Favre either release, trade, or pay him to sit on the bench. If they do anything but install Favre back as the starting QB their GM is putting his job in the hands of Rodgers...when GB ends the season 6-10 they will run the GM and Rodgers right out of town.
 
40Great One
      ID: 56438112
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 14:13 		Favre to the Jets for Pennington... make it happen! :)
 
41Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 15:40 		If they are done with Favre either release, trade, or pay him to sit on the bench.

they've offered him the second string slot. and they're not going to just release him so he can sign with a divisional rival like chicago or minnesota. you talk about bad PR - THAT'S bad PR.

green bay has handled this perfectly. it's sad to see Favre's true colors as a prima donna come out, but the reality is that he handed the reigns to the next generation, and now he is putting his own ego in front of the best interests of the team.
 
42ChicagoTRS
      ID: 4110481415
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 16:06 		It is in the best interest of the team to have Rodgers start?
 
43Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 16:19 		It is in the best interest of the team to have Rodgers start?

if you are looking only at one season, then no. but if you are looking at the bigger picture, then absolutely.

the packers have two really good young QBs. it's time to see which one is the future of the franchise.
 
44TB
      ID: 395122110
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 16:37 		I absolutely see both of your points and even agree with both of you. IMO, Favre has always been a prima donna and even though there have been times where I wished he would just go away, it's hard to argue with his accomplishments.

For sure bad form on his part in not making a decision and leaving the team in an uncertain status, but also bad form by the GM. If they want to avoid bad PR they just need to come right out and say something like, "The Green Bay Packers would be thrilled to have Brett Favre return as the starting QB and lead our team to the playoffs once again. While it's been no secret that we've begun preparing this team for a future without Brett, we do understand that he gives us the best chance to win games today. What we need from Brett is a commitment one way or the other so that the coaching staff and players can focus on the upcoming season."

I won't miss Favre and his drama when he does finally retire, but until that day happens I don't begrudge him wanting to play.
 
45KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 16:46 		if Favre wants back what is there to think about?

I think that's one of the problems. I don't think Favre knows what he actually wants. The Packers gave him plenty of time to decide and he decided. They moved on and he hasn't and, now that he's changed his mind, he's whining about it.

It is in the best interest of the team to have Rodgers start?

In my opinion, no. I don't think they'll actually win a Super Bowl with him again and I think it's time to move on to Rodgers and see what he can do.

And, honestly, what have they gained if they bring back Favre and DON'T win a Super Bowl?

They're exactly where they were at the end of this past season except now they're no closer to knowing if Rodgers is worth re-signing at the end of the season. How does that help them in any way?

Since it doesn't help them and the odds of winning a Super Bowl are not that great (just ask New England), the team needs to move on so it can make decisions about its future.
 
46ChicagoTRS
      ID: 4110481415
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 17:22 		I think you underestimate Green Bays chances of winning a superbowl with Favre...they made the NFC championship last year and lost in OT. One bad Favre pass from representing the NFC last year...I can't see their chances being much diminished this year with Favre at the helm.

Personally I believe you try and win the title when you have the opportunity...typically those opportunities do not come around often. Do not prematurely force yourself into rebuilding mode while you are still legitimately competing for the title. When Favre retired they went into rebuilding mode and started planning that way...now that he wants to play it is time to change your plans and hold off on rebuilding.

If you have a 25% chance of representing the NFC in the superbowl with Favre at the helm...and maybe a 5% with Rodgers...Rodgers sits the bench and you make another go of it with Favre. If the percentages are closer then I could agree with the argument that it is time to cut Favre loose. The fact that GB does not want to cut Favre underlines the fact that they understand that this is still a more than capable QB.



 
47KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 21:32 		If you have a 25% chance of representing the NFC in the superbowl with Favre at the helm...and maybe a 5% with Rodgers...Rodgers sits the bench and you make another go of it with Favre.

The problem with that logic is that if the team doesn't 100% win the Super Bowl, then the season was a 100% waste in terms of the development of the QB position and the understanding of the future of the franchise.

I think you underestimate Green Bays chances of winning a superbowl with Favre

I don't underestimate their chances at all. I take into account things beyond the QB position like injuries, particularly injuries to other key positions and players, a tougher schedule because of that NFC Championship, and many other factors that make it extremely difficult for a team to make the playoffs, and that much harder to make the Super Bowl.

And I recognize that short-sightedness doesn't build a franchise for long-term success. I'd rather have my franchise competing on a yearly basis 2-3 years from now than to have them compete this year and flounder for the next 5-10 because they can't figure out the QB position.
 
48Perm Dude
      ID: 386551611
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 21:49 		The question is whether Favre would be so much better than Rodgers that it is worth it for the team to put all its plans on hold while he makes up his mind.

I say that the psychological distraction would be too much for a team trying to move ahead (and GB apparently agrees).

That all said, why not let Farve go ahead and shop himself around, with the idea that the new team would have to trade for him? [Maybe because no team would make such a deal. And Favre needs to hear that face-to-face].
 
49ChicagoTRS
      ID: 344311322
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 22:30 		I wonder how the oddsmakers rate Green Bays 2009 superbowl chances with and without Favre at the helm?

Nothing is 100% in sports...you are always balancing between winning now and development but in the end when you have a true opportunity to win a championship that is the priority. Everything in your football operation should be focused on winning titles including player development.

I do not see how Favre playing two more years destroys your QB position for the next 5-10 years. You have a developed QB and not only is he developed he is in the inner circle of alltime greats and at least last year still played at his peak level (tie for 2nd best QB rating in his career). I would want my franchise to take advantage of that type player and try to win now. My franchise has not had even a good quarterback in my lifetime and they have probably went through 40...20+ just in the time Favre has been in the league...I guess it just makes me a little sick to see one go to waste...though in the end I hope the debacle continues because I have no love loss for GB...I would not shed a tear to see them flounder at the bottom of the league.

Basically Ted Thompson is staking his career that Rodgers is the second coming. If he is right and Rodgers is great more power to Ted Thompson...then maybe the move makes sense. But I will take the under on Aaron Rodgers being a great QB. Nothing against Rodgers but very few young QBs pan out. The Packers drafted Brohm in the second round this year so in reality they are not very sold on Rodgers.

I would negotiate for Favre to commit for two years. It would be a great time to think about trading Rodgers to pick up some other assets...he played one good game last year...kind of made that flash where people are talking about him. You have another high round QB pick on the bench. Brohm is ready in two years and you really do not skip a beat as far as QB development. Brohm is probably the better longterm prospect anyway.

In the end I think GB is stuck and Favre wins. Either GB is going to trade, release, or start him. They are not going to pay him 12 million to be a distraction on the bench. If I am Favre I call Green Bays bluff apply for reinstatement and force their hand. If I am a team that wants Favre I am not giving GB much of anything in trade unless a few teams start bidding. Force GB to release him or settle for little in trade. Seems like the Vikings want Favre as GB is claiming tampering.
 
50Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Wed, Jul 16, 2008, 23:06 		For the past several years after the season has ended the main story in Green Bay has been whether Favre would play another year or retire. This year, he chose to retire. People were upset, they mourned the loss of one of the greatest QBs ever, and then moved on. Now, all of a sudden Favre decides he wants to come back and does it in an unclassy way by pointing fingers at management.

If the Packers didn't have another viable option at QB, they might have welcomed him back with open arms. But, as can be interpreted by their response to Favre's wish to play, they feel they have a very capable QB already in Rodgers. Plus, it's not like we can predict how Favre would play this year. He had one of his finest seasons last year, but the two previous seasons his numbers were fairly pedestrian as he threw more INTs than TDs and had a QB rating in the low 70s. Perhaps he reverts back to that form.

 
51KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Thu, Jul 17, 2008, 10:11 		Nothing against Rodgers but very few young QBs pan out. The Packers drafted Brohm in the second round this year so in reality they are not very sold on Rodgers. [...] I would negotiate for Favre to commit for two years. It would be a great time to think about trading Rodgers to pick up some other assets. [...] Brohm is ready in two years and you really do not skip a beat as far as QB development. Brohm is probably the better longterm prospect anyway.

These statements just don't add up... unless you want to be the Chicago Bears of the QB position. ;)

Seriously, if you bring in Favre for two years, Aaron Rodgers' value plummets, particularly with Brohm in waiting. So now you're stuck trying to deal a guy that other teams know you don't need and trying to squeeze value out of a 2005 1st round pick that you never gave a real shot at performing like a 1st round pick.

Conversely, if you tell Favre that you're sticking to his "retirement," then you have a chance to see what that 1st round pick can do. And if that 1st round pick doesn't pan out, you have more potential right behind him and have time to look at other guys in case Brohm doesn't pan out. Seems like a good time to start looking towards the future and seeing what can come of it, IMHO.

And the Bears' problem with the QB position is that they apparently suck at scouting the position. Seriously, their pick-ups and drafts over the last few decades read like a team that doesn't know much about the position, particularly in hindsight. Of course, it could be the Curse of Doug Flutie...
 
52ChicagoTRS
      ID: 4110481415
      Thu, Jul 17, 2008, 11:13 		So what is the Packers move when Favre applies for reinstatement/unretires?

A) Pay him 12 million to sit on the Packers bench and be a distraction.

B) Release him.

C) Trade him.

D) Start him.

Those are the only choices.

Option A seems to be what the Packers are threatening and it is the only option Favre is not happy with. I really think it is a bluff though...there is no way the Packers/Rodgers can survive with Favre sitting on their bench. It would be a circus. The rumor is Rodgers is already fragile...imagine having the legend sitting on the bench and your fans firmly behind the legend. Ugly situation.

Option B is not very viable because the Packers do not want Favre to end up on a division rival...namely the Vikings.

Option C is going to be a tough trade unless multiple teams get involved. It seems the most likely scenario to me...he will end up in Miami or Baltimore or another AFC team. They will probably get a mid round pick. You alienate probably 75% of the GB fans...Thompson puts his job on the line if Rodgers does not perform.

Option D seems unlikely at this point as we are learning that the true issue here is the relationship between Favre and Thompson. Unless the president Mark Murphy steps in and fixes the situation.

It really is no win for Green Bay. They already have protests outside of the stadium:
Fans Protest
 
53Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Thu, Jul 17, 2008, 13:28 		It really is no win for Green Bay.

which is exactly why Favre should not be attempting to force their hand.

if he truly cared about the team or the franchise, he would be sitting back, enjoying is money and retirement.
 
54KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Thu, Jul 17, 2008, 13:54 		I would say Option C is the closest thing to a win for the Packers in this situation if Favre forces their hand.

But I also agree with Tree that if Favre actually gave a damn about the franchise, he'd just stop this nonsense.
 
55Texas Flood
      ID: 32638158
      Thu, Jul 17, 2008, 19:19 		I seriously doubt that Farve will play for the Packers this year.
I'm sure bringing him back would create cap problems.

Trade value, pretty questionable given Farve's age, salary
demands and the limited number of teams that might be a good
fit.

Start him, gives the Packers the best chance to win, but disrupts
the development of a QB who been pretty patient and has done
everything thats been asked of him.

I doubt they will pay him 12 mil to carry a clip board.

Releasing him seems to be the best option at this point.

I've lost a lot of respect for Farve and his whining shows a real
lack of class on his part. Does he really need the money or is it
simply a matter of his big fat ego and the realization that his
great career has ended.

Farve had a great season last year, but with him or without him I
doubt the Packers will be as good this year as last. Last year was
one of those magical seasons that would be very difficult to
duplicate.
 
56deepsnapper
      Leader
      ID: 017103420
      Mon, Jul 21, 2008, 11:22 		TF - I agree with the salary cap problems if Favre comes back. If he sends in the letter requesting he come off the retired/inactive list, the Packers have 24 hrs to either add him to their active roster or trade/cut him.

Fitting his $12M+ 2008 salary under the current cap might present some creative problems for Ted Thompson or whomever the capologist is for Green Bay, but with only 24 hrs to accomplish the task if no notice is give to Green Bay, it's possible players might have to be cut to fit Brett under the Cap.

He's certainly kept it interesting the past couple of weeks. lol
 
57wolfer
      ID: 25521311
      Mon, Jul 21, 2008, 16:25 		Even the minor leagues are getting into the act.
 
58Perm Dude
      ID: 35612218
      Mon, Jul 21, 2008, 16:35 		I think the NFL would given an exception to the Packers on the Favre salary re salary cap room.
 
59Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Mon, Jul 21, 2008, 16:54 		I believe both GB and Favre. GB wanted to know immediately so they could plan. Favre felt pressured and was tired at that time. He rested and now wants to come back. I don't see anythng wrong with him or that GB is caught in a pickle.

I feel for both sides.
 
60Species
      Dude
      ID: 07724916
      Tue, Jul 22, 2008, 18:58 		This is hilarious, from Rotoworld:

Favre called Vikings with Packers' phone

The Packers reportedly have Brett Favre's phone records that included "repeated calls" to Vikings head coach Brad Childress and offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.

It's unbelievable Favre was brazen enough not to consider this biting him in the ass. He's either out of touch with reality or thought the Packers would be more loyal to him (even if it helps their division rivals). If this proves true, the Packers may pick up a draft pick from the NFL. Jul. 22 - 5:49 pm et
 
61Texas Flood
      ID: 2660181
      Tue, Jul 22, 2008, 19:36 		He's taken way too many pain killers, I think he's gone brain dead.
 
62Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Wed, Jul 23, 2008, 13:19 		i like last few paragraphs of this column...

In fairness to Favre, it should be mentioned that any phone calls he made to the Vikings were made in a gunslinging fashion, and through the entire conversation, he looked like a kid out there, just having fun.

Say this turns out to be true, and tampering by the Vikings can be proved. And say that the Packers do what they're expected to do, and block Favre from playing for the Vikings. Favre could end up costing the Vikings draft picks and fines while never playing a down for them, while also putting the Packers in this miserable position.

Give him a couple more weeks, and he might just find a way to tear down the entire NFC North.

it's almost kind of sad how, in a few short weeks of doing nothing illegal at all, Favre is putting such a negative spin on his legacy...

 
63deepsnapper
      Leader
      ID: 017103420
      Fri, Aug 01, 2008, 21:17 		Evidently the Packers are about 30M under the cap so they're fine there.

I don't know how long Goodell can sit on Favre's application, but if he takes the $20M to sit out, it's going to look like he was after the money.

Favre could get paid to stay off the field
 
64Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Sun, Aug 03, 2008, 10:55 		Favre reinstated. He's flying to GB right now for the scrimmage tomorrow. He is planning on turning down thte $25M marketing agreement to staay retired at this point.
 
65deepsnapper
      Leader
      ID: 017103420
      Sun, Aug 03, 2008, 12:42 		Favre says Goodell has reinstated him, will fly to Green Bay

It appears playing ball is more important than the money to Brett. If he's got that much desire and you know he can still play, then let him play! (somewhere)

Lots of antacid being taken in Green Bay right now. ;)

 
66Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Sun, Aug 03, 2008, 13:41 		Actually scrimmage is at 6:30 CT and he gets in at 5:30. GB won't let him report until tomorrow at the earliest.
 
67wolfer
      ID: 9750318
      Sun, Aug 03, 2008, 19:56 		RE 65

Nope, they hired a consultant!
 
68Seattle Zen
      Leader
      ID: 055343019
      Sun, Aug 03, 2008, 22:35 		I have never been as FUC*ING fed up with any sports story as the Favre "saga". Just F'ing retire, you washed up bum! Don't you realize how AMAZINGLY lucky your last year was? You are going to fall flat on your face this year and should end up embarrassed, but you seem to be without much sense, so I don't think that's an emotion you are capable of recognizing.
 
69Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Sun, Aug 03, 2008, 23:59 		This could be a huge negotiating ploy. First $20M...then $25M...how high will they go? Well The Packers announced they would ad him to their roster tomorrow as reported during the HoF game today and also they were saying that the coach will allow Favre to compete for the starting job?!?! Did I hear that right? WTF?

I do think Favre was pressured to retire in a weak (exhausted) moment. But if you don't want him back...trade him.
 
70Seattle Zen
      Leader
      ID: 055343019
      Mon, Aug 04, 2008, 00:03 		Hey, ref, maybe Favre is viewed much the same as your buddy Barry Bonds, why bring in a guy over the hill who will just be a huge drama-filled distraction?

Trade him, maybe no one wants him...
 
71Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Mon, Aug 04, 2008, 15:06 		Zen, let it go. ;)

Favre is pretty much loved by public opinion universally. Bonds???
 
72ChicagoTRS
      ID: 4110481415
      Mon, Aug 04, 2008, 16:52 		20-25 million marketing agreement is sort of a ploy and not being reported correctly...this is something that was planned for Favre well before all of this drama and will probably be available to him regardless when he eventually does retire.

I guess I do not understand how everyone can discount the season he had last year...the second best in his career. Obviously it was not a typical season for a 38 year old QB but it shows he can minimally be productive and in the right situation is still a top QB in the league. If he wants to play let him play or cut him so he can play elsewhere.

Competing for the GB job is just odd. If it is a fair competition not sure how he can lose? If they continue with this open competition ploy I expect Favre to be cut a right before the season...to try and minimize his ability to play for another team. At least will take a Favre led MN out of the picture for opening weekend.
 
73Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Tue, Aug 05, 2008, 17:32 		ESPN PTI is saying that Favre to Tampa Bay is in the works or talks or whatever you want to call it.

Favre needs out of GB.
 
74Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Wed, Aug 06, 2008, 23:49 		LOL!!!

Now reports say he's already been traded to the Jets.
 
75PuNk42AE
      Donor
      ID: 036635522
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 00:04 		Claiming that it's a done deal.
 
76Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 00:04 		Looks like the Lombardi Trophy is staying in NY ;)
 
77Perm Dude
      ID: 20746619
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 00:22 		They were announcing this on ESPN as, essentially, a done deal. 4th round conditional pick, with the possibility of it upgrading to a 2nd round pick.
 
78Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 01:12 		Pack didn't want to have to face him during the season. TB is out of the division but still playing each other.
 
79barilko6
      ID: 36197
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 08:11 		I heard it can escalate as high as a first round pick if Favre takes 80% of the snaps and the Jets win the Super Bowl.

So lets say its a 3rd round pick then.
 
80barilko6
      ID: 36197
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 08:25 		Looks like its a good time to snap up the Bills home game against the Jets!
 
81Great One
      ID: 56438112
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 09:02 		POST #40
Yep.
 
82Mattinglyinthehall
      Dude
      ID: 01629107
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 09:14 		Kill me.
 
83smallwhirled
      ID: 2971578
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 09:16 		Thank god. FTV (Favre TV) was worse than Bonds TV, Clemens TV, and even Owens TV.

 
84Perm Dude
      ID: 20746619
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 10:10 		I don't know how you can think it is over--Favre will now play in the largest media market in the country.
 
85smallwhirled
      ID: 2971578
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 10:59 		It's not over....but hopefully they can tone it down just a little? That's all I ask, I'm so sick and tired of Favre.
 
86Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Thu, Aug 07, 2008, 12:40 		I hope today is the last major day to talk about Favre. OMG. I've been truning off ESPN just so I can avoid it.
 
87barilko6
      ID: 12717911
      Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 12:22 		I see the Jets listed at +/- 7 wins now that Favre is in town. Does anyone know or recall what it was before the trade?
 
88KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Wed, Feb 11, 2009, 11:28 		For real this time... until he decides to unretire and play for an even worse team like the Lions.
 
89sarge33rd
      ID: 17681812
      Tue, Aug 18, 2009, 13:21 		Looks like I'm about to become a Green Bay fan

I'm on record as saying if Minn signs Favre, it would be more than I could bear. I've lived through their signing one aged, broken down QB after another and it sure looks like they're doing it again.

If they go through with this one, I'll be ending a 40 year love-hate relationship as a Vikings fan.
 
90ChicagoTRS
      ID: 1550160
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 01:03 		ok...I can't believe I defended Favre last season...he is a moron. I am glad to see him back though...hopefully GB and Chicago can exact a little revenge on old Favre...I really do not think it helps Minny much...probably sets them back long term.
 
91TB
      ID: 347411513
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 01:12 		I don't understand why. Favre gives them a much better chance to advance to the playoffs this year. Not sure how long your list of aged, broken down QB's could be. Minny has a pretty long history of drafting and starting their own QB's. Sure, they signed a vet here or there with mixed success but I'd guess not near as much as most other teams.
 
92TB
      ID: 347411513
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 01:12 		Was replying to sarge in the post above.
 
93sarge33rd
      ID: 17681812
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 10:36 		Jim McMahon
R Cunningham

Then there is the historic fvck up trade of all NFL history...the Herschel Walker deal.

7-9 is my prediction for the year, and if Favre starts more than half the games...Minnesota leads the league in INTs thrown.

Childress said "We have a Defense..."

NO YOU DON'T! You rank high against the run, because no one runs on you. They throw the ball into that sieve you call a defensive backfield. With Methusala back there tossing the ball up for grabs, gonna be reminiscent of the old Miami Dolphins only w/o Dan Marino at the helm. You'll lose ball games 45-17 and you'll only score the 17 cause of A Peterson.
 
94Mith
      ID: 1871267
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 11:14 		I just can't wait until the TV networks are finally able to update their most recent game video of Favre so that I don't have to see him in a Jets uniform every day.
 
95sarge33rd
      ID: 17681812
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 11:24 		for 40-41 years I have held firm and steadfast in defense of this team. The deepest of rivers however, will eventually run dry. This move...has dried up this river.
 
96Mith
      ID: 1871267
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 11:33 		Well we'd sure love to have you aboard but I'm not sure that I could in good conscience recommend becoming a Jets fan.
 
97Slizz
      ID: 487271622
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 12:12 		Are the Vikings a better team with Favre? Most Definitely. I mean they were stuck with the Gus the past season!

However, thats not going to make a difference should the Williams Wall gets suspended. Those 1st 4 games that were once looked at as gimmes (at Cleveland, at Detroit, San Francisco, Green Bay) are suddenly toss-up's. With Chilly at the helm, anything short of 4-0/3-1 could be disastrous for the Vikings' playoff hopes.

 
98Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 12:52 		They are a better team with Favre.
 
99Perm Dude
      ID: 154552311
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 13:10 		I can't imagine easier games for Favre to warm up with than against Cleveland and Detroit. By Week 3, cue the Sports Illustrated cover: "He's Back! Can Favre Lead The Vikes All the Way?"

 
100Seattle Zen
      ID: 427441912
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 13:45 		Glad to be rid of you, sarge, to be honest. Go cheer for someone else, you are bad luck.

A real Vikings fan cheers anything that pisses off the cheeseheads. And a Vikings fan remembers the Cunningham years fondly, but you have seemed to have lost a lot of memory capacity in your doddering old age.

Your 7-9 prediction warms my heart, you are the reverse SI curse!
 
101Seattle Zen
      ID: 427441912
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 13:49 		You forgot Jeff George, Sarge.

Using your logic, if you were a AZ Cardinals fan, you would have sworn the team off when they signed Kurt Warner and sat there stewing when they went to the Super Bowl.
 
102ChicagoTRS
      ID: 3218189
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 17:43 		Favre is definitely an upgrade...though I question if he will be able to last a season...playing on turf for 8 games will take a toll...a shoulder with a torn rotator cuff that could not hold up last season is very unlikely to now hold up a season later.

Though having a running game led by Peterson and a very solid defense will help quite a bit. Watching espn last night those donkeys were all saying Minny w/Favre is now the class of the NFC and the team to beat. I do not really buy that...I do not see them as being much better than their NFC rivals in GB and CHI.
 
103sarge33rd
      ID: 197521920
      Wed, Aug 19, 2009, 21:52 		The move they should have pursued,was the deal CHI cut and got Cutler. Long term building with clear prospect at immediate results also.

Yes, SZ I did forget George. Curse you for reminding me of that travesty.

GB wins the Div, with CHI edging Minny out by 1 game to take 2nd. Det trails at the bottom of the Div, surprisingly only 2 games behind the Vikings.
 
104Slizz
      ID: 487271622
      Thu, Aug 20, 2009, 12:30 		TRS - you're preaching to the choir here.

Chicago is going to win the division by at least 2 games. They added Rod Marinelli to their staff - this time, doing what he does best: coaching up the defensive line (The Bears' defensive line pass rush was the among the worst in the NFL, so it can only get better). Despite that, their defense, as a whole, was solid. The yards per rush, 3.4, was 3rd in the league, Turnovers forced, 32, was 2nd in the league, and yards per pass play, 6.20, was 8th in the league. Not to mention, Urlacher is finally healthy and not going into a season with a nagging injury.

As Peter King said, if Cutler can navigate the Bears to 400 points on the year, a 1.5ppg increase over a season ago, I don't see why they won't get to 11+ wins.

As for Green Bay, (I won't go into too much detail) their transition to the 3-4, 2 AGiNG defensive backs, Harrell's possible career ending injury, Hawk's overratedness, the worst starting RB in the entire NFL (Grant), loss of Mark Tauscher, and a extremely tough schedule to finish the season (Baltimore, at Chicago, at Pittsburgh, Seattle, at Arizona) have all the makings of a .500-ish season.

If the 'Williams Wall' gets suspended, Bears run away with the division. I don't care who they have throwing the ball.

 
105rockafellerskank
      Dude
      ID: 27652109
      Wed, Aug 26, 2009, 22:23 		prediction(s): -- play along....

Minn goes 2-0 in spite of Favre and then goes 0-6 to end 2-6 at the bye week. Favre gets benched forever with a 76 QB rating.
 
106Seattle Zen
      ID: 47542621
      Wed, Aug 26, 2009, 22:54 		LMAO... Bears. Slizz, that's too much!
 
107Slizz
      ID: 487271622
      Thu, Aug 27, 2009, 01:30 		Child Please! I'm telling you...watch out for them!
 
108Seattle Zen
      Leader
      ID: 055343019
      Mon, Nov 23, 2009, 00:02 		Wow, this thread is hilarious.

The only one who was right was RFS in 105. I saw it today, Favre was benched ;)

Slizz looking like genius warning us to "watch out" for the Bears. Yes, you need to keep your eyes open, you never know when an errant Jay Cutler throw may hit you in the head, in the stands.

Chicago is going to win the division by at least 2 games.

Well, they DO have a two game lead on the Lions.

Hey, I was wrong in post 68, though I certainly wasn't alone in thinking that Favre was washed up. Well, when you play half a season with a torn bicep, you ain't going to succeed.

I also have a new perspective on the "media circus" that surrounds Brett. I think it has helped the Vikings in two ways. First, it has made the whole team buy into the hype, it's good for morale. Secondly, it takes the spotlight OFF Adrian Peterson. He can come to work, make his highlight reel material on the field, take a shower and chill. Far fewer press hassles for the young guy.

sarge - The move they should have pursued,was the deal CHI cut and got Cutler. Long term building with clear prospect at immediate results also.

So what team are you rooting for these days, sarge? Vikings fans are doing fine without ya!
 
109sarge33rd
      ID: 401049237
      Mon, Nov 23, 2009, 08:49 		Thanks SZ. :(

Was just coming in to post that it was apparently, high time i admitted that I was just about as wrong, as one can possibly be, re Favre and this season. (And no, I'm not about to jump on the bandwagon now.)

Rooting for my old AFC team; the Dolphins. *shrug* Always was a fan of them in the AFC and the Vikes in the NFC. Gonna chalk this year up to too many recreational drugs in my teens and claim a latent/residual affect. This season, doesn't exist in my ind and I can therefore happily ignore it in the future. You know, sorta like that whole dream thing from Dallas umpty-ump years ago.
 
110Slizz
      ID: 341022514
      Mon, Nov 23, 2009, 21:48 		lol. I deserve that much. but I would hold off on the S--- talk until your beloved Vikings beat my Bears.

Freakin Cutler. Cost us 4 games so far:

1) Green Bay (15-21) - SNF and those awful 4 INT's

2) Atlanta (14-21) - 2 redzone INT's combined with Matt Forte's goalline fumble.

3) San Francisco (6-10) - 5 INT's, need I say more.

4) Philadelphia (24-20) - the 3 overthrows that should've been TD's. This season, by far, has been the most patience-trying for me as a fan.

That and their offensive line stinks. We will rise again!

 
111sarge33rd
      ID: 1510552414
      Tue, Nov 24, 2009, 15:55 		since SZ is so gleefully pointing out posts from the past, check out this winner. #68 above:

I have never been as FUC*ING fed up with any sports story as the Favre "saga". Just F'ing retire, you washed up bum! Don't you realize how AMAZINGLY lucky your last year was? You are going to fall flat on your face this year and should end up embarrassed, but you seem to be without much sense, so I don't think that's an emotion you are capable of recognizing.

authored by who else? :) Our very own Seattle Zen.

;)
 
112Seattle Zen
      ID: 1410391215
      Tue, Nov 24, 2009, 17:21 		Yeah, sarge, I mentioned that post in post 108:

Hey, I was wrong in post 68, though I certainly wasn't alone in thinking that Favre was washed up.
 
113sarge33rd
      ID: 3210352416
      Tue, Nov 24, 2009, 17:35 		true enough; but I felt "the need" if you know what I mean. :D
 
114Electroman
      ID: 565182111
      Fri, Nov 27, 2009, 17:32 		Saw this in SI, in the sign of the apocalypse box

"Iraqi detainees at a prison camp in Baghdad have been taunting U.S. soldiers from Wisconsin about Brett Favre's signing with the Vikings."

Thought that was hilarious.
 
115sarge33rd
      ID: 3710442717
      Fri, Nov 27, 2009, 18:44 		lmao gotta agree with ya on that one
 
116Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Mon, Jan 17, 2011, 14:27 		Finally the end?
 
117Frick
      ID: 5310541617
      Mon, Jan 17, 2011, 15:48 		Deadspin had an article where they were showing Favre memorabilia for sale on Favre's website. I'm sure Peter King will camp out in Mississippi for a couple of weeks and help stroke Favre's ego.