He is signed if they allow him to come back. No question. When all is said and done do not be surprised if Rodgers gets traded and #4 plays 2 more years. They will trade him outside the division or keep him. No other choices. GB holds all the cards. Its not like we have been through this b4.
what would they do with their current QB?? Brees is just as good as Favre right nowAs I stated the day of his retirement(or close to it), Favre is a perfect fit for the.........
NEW ORLEANS SAINTS
......and it was his favorite team growing up, not to mention its a stones throw away from his home in Hattiesburg.
OH WHEN THE SAINTS, GO MARCHING IN.........
ope:
Why the Packers won't take Favre back
By Tom Silverstein
Friday, Jul 11 2008, 05:48 PM
A lot of people are wondering what is the Packers' rationale in not allowing Brett Favre to return to the team.
Neither general manager Ted Thompson nor coach Mike McCarthy have addressed this issue (even though they need to immediately).
But two sources, one familiar with Thompson and the other with McCarthy, described the thought process as they understood it.
First and foremost, Thompson took Favre at his word that when he announced his retirement that he was finished. There's no question Thompson could have done more to get Favre to come back, but he couldn't wait until June for an answer and he didn't think he needed to talk Favre into playing if he didn't want to.
Still, what would be the harm in letting Favre change his mind and come back for another season? After all, he was one bad throw away from going to the Super Bowl, and chances are the team will be better this year than last year.
According to one of the sources, Thompson has done more than he has let on in regard to giving Favre the opportunity to return. He said Thompson won't reveal those attempts publicly because he doesn't think it's necessary. He said he did not think it was his place to reveal them either.
Apparently, however, one of those instances occurred in late March and early April. According to FOXSports.com, Thompson and McCarthy received word Favre wanted to return, and decided they would be open to the idea. However, a couple of days before they were to meet with Favre to finalize his return, Favre called them and told them he had changed his mind.
As one of the sources said, Thompson sees things in very black and white terms and if he tells someone he'll meet them for lunch at noon or will lend them $50 or or will count every shot on the golf course, he's resolute about doing it. As a player, he fought every season to make the Houston Oilers roster and when his career was over it wasn't by his choice. In his mind, you either want to play or you don't.
Thompson has had a very hard time dealing with Favre's indecision over the past three years, in part because of his NFL background and in part because he doesn't think any one player should be held above the team. He has acknowledged that Favre deserves special consideration because of his status, but he refuses to bend too far for fear that the atmosphere will start to slide back to what it was under Mike Sherman when Favre basically had his way on everything.
Beyond the constant waffling, there are other factors involved.
According to one of the sources, if Favre comes back, the Packers will lose Aaron Rodgers, Favre's presumptive successor, for good. There is no way after three years as a backup and a fourth as a spurned starter, that he will re-sign with the Packers when his contract is up after 2009. His spirit will be broken and his bitterness will be hard to deny.
The Packers will have wasted three years of grooming a quarterback and have only rookies Brian Brohm and Matt Flynn as possible successors. There are no guarantees that Rodgers will be as successful as Favre was last year, but there's also no guarantee that Favre will be as good as he was last year either.
As is the case with most rookie quarterbacks these days, it takes two or three years to develop into a reliable starter. Most NFL insiders have said that Rodgers' situation has been ideal and gives him the best chance to succeed because he wasn't thrown into the fire. There is still plenty of uncertainty about Rodgers and whether he's equipped to be a successful NFL starter, especially where durability is concerned, but the Packers seem sold on him completely.
And there is also the undeniable fact that Favre faltered in the cold and was outplayed by Kyle Orton and Eli Manning in severe weather conditions. Those might have been aberrations, but they certainly are something to consider.
There are also some of the statements Favre made at his retirement press conference that would scare most coaches and general managers, most notably those about being burned out and questioning whether the pressure was getting to him. If Favre was burned out as late as April and hasn't been working out the way he did in recent years, there may be reason to worry about him getting burned out or physically tired during the season.
Thompson's philosophy since becoming general manager in 2005 has been to create an atmosphere of equality and brotherhood in the locker room. When he got there, coach Mike Sherman had created a situation where Favre was given latitude no other player was given. Understandably, he deserved most of it, but his absence from mini-camps and off-season workouts was setting a poor example for the rest of the team.
Both Thompson and McCarthy fought hard to change the dynamics in the locker room and began to demand more accountability from Favre and other veterans. That push and pull to create more of an equal state in the locker room created an undercurrent of tension between Thompson and Favre, who were in different stages of their careers (Thompson at the start of his, Favre at the end of his).
http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/07/11/why-the-packers-won-t-take-favre-back.aspx
By Tom Silverstein
Friday, Jul 11 2008, 05:48 PM
A lot of people are wondering what is the Packers' rationale in not allowing Brett Favre to return to the team.
Neither general manager Ted Thompson nor coach Mike McCarthy have addressed this issue (even though they need to immediately).
But two sources, one familiar with Thompson and the other with McCarthy, described the thought process as they understood it.
First and foremost, Thompson took Favre at his word that when he announced his retirement that he was finished. There's no question Thompson could have done more to get Favre to come back, but he couldn't wait until June for an answer and he didn't think he needed to talk Favre into playing if he didn't want to.
Still, what would be the harm in letting Favre change his mind and come back for another season? After all, he was one bad throw away from going to the Super Bowl, and chances are the team will be better this year than last year.
According to one of the sources, Thompson has done more than he has let on in regard to giving Favre the opportunity to return. He said Thompson won't reveal those attempts publicly because he doesn't think it's necessary. He said he did not think it was his place to reveal them either.
Apparently, however, one of those instances occurred in late March and early April. According to FOXSports.com, Thompson and McCarthy received word Favre wanted to return, and decided they would be open to the idea. However, a couple of days before they were to meet with Favre to finalize his return, Favre called them and told them he had changed his mind.
As one of the sources said, Thompson sees things in very black and white terms and if he tells someone he'll meet them for lunch at noon or will lend them $50 or or will count every shot on the golf course, he's resolute about doing it. As a player, he fought every season to make the Houston Oilers roster and when his career was over it wasn't by his choice. In his mind, you either want to play or you don't.
Thompson has had a very hard time dealing with Favre's indecision over the past three years, in part because of his NFL background and in part because he doesn't think any one player should be held above the team. He has acknowledged that Favre deserves special consideration because of his status, but he refuses to bend too far for fear that the atmosphere will start to slide back to what it was under Mike Sherman when Favre basically had his way on everything.
Beyond the constant waffling, there are other factors involved.
According to one of the sources, if Favre comes back, the Packers will lose Aaron Rodgers, Favre's presumptive successor, for good. There is no way after three years as a backup and a fourth as a spurned starter, that he will re-sign with the Packers when his contract is up after 2009. His spirit will be broken and his bitterness will be hard to deny.
The Packers will have wasted three years of grooming a quarterback and have only rookies Brian Brohm and Matt Flynn as possible successors. There are no guarantees that Rodgers will be as successful as Favre was last year, but there's also no guarantee that Favre will be as good as he was last year either.
As is the case with most rookie quarterbacks these days, it takes two or three years to develop into a reliable starter. Most NFL insiders have said that Rodgers' situation has been ideal and gives him the best chance to succeed because he wasn't thrown into the fire. There is still plenty of uncertainty about Rodgers and whether he's equipped to be a successful NFL starter, especially where durability is concerned, but the Packers seem sold on him completely.
And there is also the undeniable fact that Favre faltered in the cold and was outplayed by Kyle Orton and Eli Manning in severe weather conditions. Those might have been aberrations, but they certainly are something to consider.
There are also some of the statements Favre made at his retirement press conference that would scare most coaches and general managers, most notably those about being burned out and questioning whether the pressure was getting to him. If Favre was burned out as late as April and hasn't been working out the way he did in recent years, there may be reason to worry about him getting burned out or physically tired during the season.
Thompson's philosophy since becoming general manager in 2005 has been to create an atmosphere of equality and brotherhood in the locker room. When he got there, coach Mike Sherman had created a situation where Favre was given latitude no other player was given. Understandably, he deserved most of it, but his absence from mini-camps and off-season workouts was setting a poor example for the rest of the team.
Both Thompson and McCarthy fought hard to change the dynamics in the locker room and began to demand more accountability from Favre and other veterans. That push and pull to create more of an equal state in the locker room created an undercurrent of tension between Thompson and Favre, who were in different stages of their careers (Thompson at the start of his, Favre at the end of his).
http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/07/11/why-the-packers-won-t-take-favre-back.aspx
0 % Chance of happening Brees is betterAs I stated the day of his retirement(or close to it), Favre is a perfect fit for the.........
NEW ORLEANS SAINTS
......and it was his favorite team growing up, not to mention its a stones throw away from his home in Hattiesburg.
OH WHEN THE SAINTS, GO MARCHING IN.........
Favre holds all the cards here.
He wants to play in GB or be released
He's owed $39,000,000 over the next 3 years.
He can figuratively block any trade. All he has to do is say he won't play for the team... Then they won't trade for him.
GB has 4 options:
1. Let Favre return (The only option if I owned the team)
2. Let Favre return and pay him to sit on the bench.
3. Release him.
4. Trade him to a team he chooses
Sean
He wants to play in GB or be released
He's owed $39,000,000 over the next 3 years.
He can figuratively block any trade. All he has to do is say he won't play for the team... Then they won't trade for him.
GB has 4 options:
1. Let Favre return (The only option if I owned the team)
2. Let Favre return and pay him to sit on the bench.
3. Release him.
4. Trade him to a team he chooses
Sean
As I stated the day of his retirement(or close to it), Favre is a perfect fit for the.........
NEW ORLEANS SAINTS
......and it was his favorite team growing up, not to mention its a stones throw away from his home in Hattiesburg.
OH WHEN THE SAINTS, GO MARCHING IN.........
This is stupid. Putting Favre on the Saints gives them less of a chance of winning. Brees could possibly be a pro bowl QB. Favre is way past his prime and way too careless with the football for my liking. He's a great guy and I respect him because he's had a great career and has always been a stand up guy, but he doesn't have it anymore and it showed last year against the Giants.
Whoever takes Favre is making a mistake IMO, but as long as it isn't the Broncos I don't care.
I know I sound like a homer, but why not the Raiders? They have a very good defense, a bunch of solid runiing backs and Favre would be able to throw to Javon again. The raiders were a lot better than their record last year. They were in almost every game and have a very manageable schedule. With Favre they could conceivably go 11-5.
2008 Oakland Raiders regular season schedule
Week 1 : Sept. 8 (Mon.) Denver Broncos 7:15 p.m.
Week 2: Sept. 14 at Kansas City Chiefs 10 a.m.
Week 3: Sept. 21 at Buffalo Bills 10 a.m.
Week 4: Sept. 28 San Diego Chargers 1:05 p.m.
Week 5: Oct. 5 Bye
Week 6: Oct. 12 at New Orleans Saints 10 a.m.
Week 7: Oct. 19 New York Jets 1:15 p.m.
Week 8 Oct. 26 at Baltimore Ravens 10 a.m.
Week 9: Nov. 2 Atlanta Falcons 1:15 p.m.
Week 10: Nov. 9 Carolina Panthers 1:05 p.m.
Week 11: Nov. 16 at Miami Dolphins 10 a.m.
Week 12: Nov. 23 at Denver Broncos 1:05 p.m.
Week 13: Nov. 30 Kansas City Chiefs 1:15 p.m.
Week 14: Dec. 4 (Thurs.) at San Diego Chargers 5:15 p.m.
Week 15: Dec. 14 New England Patriots 1:15 p.m.
Week 16: Dec. 21 Houston Texans 1:05 p.m.
Week 17: Dec. 28 at Tampa Bay Buccaneers 10 a.m.
Week 1 : Sept. 8 (Mon.) Denver Broncos 7:15 p.m.
Week 2: Sept. 14 at Kansas City Chiefs 10 a.m.
Week 3: Sept. 21 at Buffalo Bills 10 a.m.
Week 4: Sept. 28 San Diego Chargers 1:05 p.m.
Week 5: Oct. 5 Bye
Week 6: Oct. 12 at New Orleans Saints 10 a.m.
Week 7: Oct. 19 New York Jets 1:15 p.m.
Week 8 Oct. 26 at Baltimore Ravens 10 a.m.
Week 9: Nov. 2 Atlanta Falcons 1:15 p.m.
Week 10: Nov. 9 Carolina Panthers 1:05 p.m.
Week 11: Nov. 16 at Miami Dolphins 10 a.m.
Week 12: Nov. 23 at Denver Broncos 1:05 p.m.
Week 13: Nov. 30 Kansas City Chiefs 1:15 p.m.
Week 14: Dec. 4 (Thurs.) at San Diego Chargers 5:15 p.m.
Week 15: Dec. 14 New England Patriots 1:15 p.m.
Week 16: Dec. 21 Houston Texans 1:05 p.m.
Week 17: Dec. 28 at Tampa Bay Buccaneers 10 a.m.
