Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron


    
      
        Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
        (https://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi)
      

        the Gridiron >> the Red Zone >>  Packers Offseason Report
        
(Message started by: MordecaiCourage on Mar 4^th, 2008, 11:43am)

Title: Packers Offseason Report
Post by MordecaiCourage on Mar 4^th, 2008, 11:43am

Say it aint so Brett!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080304/sp_nm/nfl_favre_dc

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Philly on Mar 4^th, 2008, 3:29pm

It is so...

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8070597b&template=with-video&confirm=true

Welcome to the Aaron Rodgers era.

Yes, that means everyone can forget that the 'v' comes before the 'r' in Favre and start trying to remember that there is a 'd' in Rodgers. [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Mar 4^th, 2008, 6:06pm

It would be interesting to know if...

1. If Favre manned-up and mentored Rodgers while Rodgers waited.

2. If Favre takes a broadcast job, does he have to shave.

3. Will Rodgers have anything at DB.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Apr 4^th, 2008, 8:37pm

False alarm... according to "The REAL Feed":

Favre: Return to NFL is 'last thing I'm thinking about (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/packers/2008-04-03-favre-reports_N.htm?csp=34)
USA TODAY: Sports (04.04.2008 12:10)
Brett Favre is moving to squelch rumors he's considering aborting the retirement he announced last month. The former Packers ...

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 2^nd, 2008, 5:02pm

Who'd a thunk it, right??? From "The REAL Feed":

Source: Favre in touch with Packers about return (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3471189&campaign=rss&source=NFLHeadlines)
ESPN: NFL (02.07.2008 16:52)
With his family "tugging" on him to play, Brett Favre has an "itch" to come out of retirement and report to training camp with the Green Bay Packers later this month, according to sources close to the team and player.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Jul 2^nd, 2008, 11:58pm

OK. I don't have time to go for the links. The thing that happened was that a couple or few weeks ago Brett and his agent talked to the Packers about Brett coming back. In the end, the Pack told Brett that they had just spent the offseason working on life after Brett - and they didn't want him back. Brett said that he therefore wanted to be released rather than retired. The Packers said no - if he didn't retire, they would keep him and trade him rather than give him 10 mil.

Hey, Brett.... [smiley=cantcatch.gif] [smiley=cantcatch.gif] [smiley=cantcatch.gif] [smiley=cantcatch.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 3^rd, 2008, 6:50pm

Intriguing editorial, documentary piece regarding the potential Favre comeback... currently topping "The REAL Feed":

Seifert: History working against Favre-less Packers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=seifert_kevin&id=3472447&campaign=rss&source=NFLHeadlines)
ESPN: NFL (03.07.2008 16:43)
Brett Favre reportedly still has the desire to play. Should the Packers want him to return? Well, teams do tend to struggle the year after losing a Hall of Fame QB, writes Kevin Seifert.

The implicit answer as I read it... Favre comeback... [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 8^th, 2008, 5:06pm

Nothing too small not to report on this front... From "The REAL Feed":

Report: Favre sends text message to Packers GM (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3477600&campaign=rss&source=NFLHeadlines)
ESPN: NFL (08.07.2008 10:16)
Brett Favre sent a text message to Packers GM Ted Thompson on Saturday, but Thompson replied was that he is on vacation and the two men will have to talk later, according to media reports.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 11^th, 2008, 6:17pm

Favre officially pushing the envelope on this... He really does want to come back... HOT off "The REAL Feed (http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/newsstand.htm)":

Favre asks Packers for release to play elsewhere (http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10894673/rss)
CBS SportsLine.com NFL News (11.07.2008 17:34)
Brett Favre wants the Green Bay Packers to release him so he can return to the NFL with another team, according to an ESPN report.

Could you imagine Favre in a uni other than the Packers??? Yikes!!! [smiley=yikes.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 11^th, 2008, 8:04pm

on 07/11/08 at 18:17:27, StegRock wrote:

The Packers' response... currently tops "The REAL Feed":

Packers respond to Favre's request for release (http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=sportsnetwork&page=nfl/news/news.aspx?id=4164204)
The Sports Network: NFL (11.07.2008 18:52)

Doesn't look the Packers are budgin'...

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by DB on Jul 11^th, 2008, 9:26pm

Well.... Joe Montana was a Chief at the end of his career. That was weird at first but still cool to watch. I guess this is hardly a surprise.

As a Redskins' fan, even though I like Jason Campbell, I can't help to think how exciting it would be to play for my team or even the Jets, who I root for locally. It seems like the Packers have moved on so it will be interesting to see where Farve ends up. I could also see him in K.C., Buff, or San Fran but cannot picture him in a Dolphin uniform (I don't know why) and certainly not as a Bear or Viking for obvious reasons.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 12^th, 2008, 6:07am

Well, here's what USA Today thinks, DB... From "The REAL Feed":

Where would Favre go? Ten places he could call home (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-07-11-favre-possibilities_N.htm?csp=34)
USA TODAY: Sports (11.07.2008 23:16)
With Brett Favre seeking his release from the Green Bay Packers, the question many NFL fans want answered is where should the ...

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 12^th, 2008, 6:02pm

Jets are at least saying, "Thank you, but no thank you," right now... This LOCAL report currently tops "The REAL Feed":

Source: Jets won't pursue Favre (http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/2008/07/12/2008-07-12_source_jets_wont_pursue_brett_favre.html)
New York Daily News: Sports - Football (12.07.2008 17:11)
The Jets have virtually ruled out pursuing Brett Favre if the Packers trade or release him. "It's a long shot right now that the Jets have any interest," an NFL source familiar with the Jets' thinking told the Daily News Saturday.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 13^th, 2008, 4:11am

But, maybe the Pack will keep him around after all... according to what's currently atop "The REAL Feed":

Thompson talks about Favre situation, says Rodgers is starter (http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=sportsnetwork&page=nfl/news/news.aspx?id=4164544)
The Sports Network: NFL (13.07.2008 02:34)

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 13^th, 2008, 4:31pm

The moment-to-moment on this... currently topping "The REAL Feed":

Rally held to pressure Packers to reinstate Favre (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/wires/07/13/2020.ap.fbn.favre.rally.0185/index.html) [smiley=demonstration.gif]
SI.com: NFL (13.07.2008 15:19)

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Philly on Jul 13^th, 2008, 9:13pm

I've always been a Favre fan, but I think he put the Pack in a really bad spot. He needs to either stay retired or accept being a back-up to Rodgers.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 13^th, 2008, 10:09pm

on 07/13/08 at 21:13:41, Philly wrote:

I've always been a Favre fan, but I think he put the Pack in a really bad spot. He needs to either stay retired or accept being a back-up to Rodgers.

4100+ YDS...28 TD'S...1 GAME FROM THE SUPERBOWL [smiley=idontknow.gif] SEEMS TO ME THE PACKERS ARE NOT CONSIDERING THAT LITTLE TIDBIT!! STAY RETIRED WHEN YOU HAVE THIS POTENTIAL...NO...FAVRE BACKING UP RODGERS IS ABSURD! START HIM OR TRADE HIM.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Philly on Jul 13^th, 2008, 10:22pm

on 07/13/08 at 22:09:03, MordecaiCourage wrote:

Hmm... I don't know that I need to be YELLED at!

Anyway... I agree that the Packers should try to trade him. However, it's likely that his trade value is close to nil right now because of the situation.

I don't agree that the Packers should bend over backwards to accomodate Favre. They've been very generous to him as a franchise. Each year for the past few they've had to deal with the uncertainty of his return--his little ruse of potential retirement. Now he finally retires, so the Pack go out and name Rodgers the starter (and likely start building an offense around his particular skill set) and they also use two draft picks (including #56 overall) to add depth to the position because Favre is gone.

I have a LOT more sympathy for the franchise than the player in this situation.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by T-Rave on Jul 13^th, 2008, 11:25pm

on 07/13/08 at 22:22:56, Philly wrote:

I have a LOT more sympathy for the franchise than the player in this situation.

I agree with Philly. This last line of his says it all. They've moved on. Period.

Reminds me somehow about . . . a boy . . . and crying wolf.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 14^th, 2008, 12:31am

With the aforementioned stats, I doubt his trade value is anywhere close to nil, regardless of the situation!! To me a situation that would keep a player from having any trade value would be that he's a cancer of some sort...Brett is no where near that, unless you call his desire to play a cancer. Maybe if his name was Brett "Pacman" Favre or something like that I could see a team not wanting to mess with him, but c'mon. If they have indeed moved on as suggested, then trade him. I believe that is what he wants if he can't have the reigns back. Besides, the Packers can get more out of a trade then to have him in a back-up role couldn't they.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 14^th, 2008, 6:13am

on 07/13/08 at 22:22:56, Philly wrote:

... so the Pack go out and name Rodgers the starter (and likely start building an offense around his particular skill set)

I think that (mainly the part in bold) is being overblown. How many times does an injury claim a starter and the back-up plays lights out? Going back to Farve cannot be that rough of a transition.

Quote:

... they also use two draft picks (including #56 overall) to add depth to the position because Favre is gone.

I do agree that, with Favre coming back, the drafting of Brohm does create a glut at the position for the team. But, hey, getting Brohm some Favrian tutelage can't be a bad thing.

on 07/13/08 at 22:09:03, MordecaiCourage wrote:

THIS, I do think is being played down, and that, not to indicate a raising of his voice, is why I think MC put it all in caps, PhilMaster.

...

At the end of the day, he's human,... and through all this we are learning about his personality. He LOVES football, and he's an indecisive guy when it comes to ending his career (DULY NOTE FROM HERE ON OUT). I'm not saying he's gone about this the best way possible. It is what it is; it is who he is, and it is becoming a (negative) part of the person he is authoring himself to be. But, worse crimes have been committed (by active NFL players). He should have waited until he was absolutely certain, it can be said. But, again, he's human. Maybe, at that time, he was "absolutely certain". And, then his mind changed. That was then. This is now. That's the human factor. People's minds change. The problem isn't so much that Brett changed his mind as it is that the Pack can't handle it. In fact, Brett's changing his mind isn't the problem (by definition). If you think it through, it's a problem (quite literally) for the Pack, not Brett.

I can't help thinking that one dude could put this all to rest by taking the high road. How cool would it be if Aaron Rodgers came out and said, "I welcome my brother, mentor and father figure, Brett, back with arms wide-open and fully welcome the opportunity to receive another season of tutelage from him and further observe first-hand (what) greatness (is like) so I can better emulate it???" I also can't help thinking that this is much ado about nothing. Plugging "Brett Favre" back in "Green Bay" after the season he and the team had last year just doesn't seem like it should be a difficult proposition at all.

All rhetoric aside, I think the Pack will have cut off their nose to spite their face if they let Brett go and proceed with Aaron... [smiley=stilldunno.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Philly on Jul 14^th, 2008, 6:01pm

on 07/14/08 at 00:31:49, MordecaiCourage wrote:

I'm not saying that Favre is a cancer or a bad guy or anything... far from it. But the fact remains that teams will be hesitant to trade for a player who his own team isn't all that interested in having back. Why trade for him when it's possible that he'll eventually be granted his release. (And that's not to mention his current contract. I don't know what kind of cap hit the Pack takes if they trade him, but I thought I saw his current deal still had 3 years and $39 million on it.) And even if the Pack manage to find a trade partner, are we sure that Brett will just pack his bags and go play for some team that has no shot to make a playoff run, with or without Favre?

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Philly on Jul 14^th, 2008, 6:05pm

on 07/14/08 at 06:13:23, StegRock wrote:

I can't help thinking that one dude could put this all to rest by taking the high road. How cool would it be if Aaron Rodgers came out and said, "I welcome my brother, mentor and father figure, Brett, back with arms wide-open and fully welcome the opportunity to receive another season of tutelage from him and further observe first-hand (what) greatness (is like) so I can better emulate it???"

Huh? Aaron Rodgers comes out and gives Favre an invite to step back into the starting role and the Packers front office and coaching staff will then see that it happens? Honestly, I don't think the brass really care what Rodgers wants to happen here.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 14^th, 2008, 11:23pm

on 07/14/08 at 18:05:41, Philly wrote:

Well, if that's the case, that's just messed up. But, anyway, I don't mean that Rodger's should say this to the media. I mean behind closed doors with the team. Regardless of what the team wants to do, I think that would be the totally stand-up thing to do, and I don't see how the team could see it otherwise.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Philly on Jul 15^th, 2008, 6:33am

on 07/14/08 at 23:23:57, StegRock wrote:

I just wonder why Aaron Rodgers has to be the stand-up guy here. I would think the stand-up thing would be for Favre to just stay retired and stop screwing around with Aaron Rodgers--a guy who has very patiently taken the high road for a few years now while waiting for his shot to run the team.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Tony_O on Jul 15^th, 2008, 12:25pm

on 07/14/08 at 00:31:49, MordecaiCourage wrote:

If they have indeed moved on as suggested, then trade him. I believe that is what he wants if he can't have the reigns back. Besides, the Packers can get more out of a trade then to have him in a back-up role couldn't they.

The "Problem" is that Brett Farve and his agent DONT want to be traded. They want his full release, which means they could sign with any team that they want to with the Packers getting nothing in return. The Pack do not want to see Brett playing with either the Vikings or Bears in the same division, none the less get nothing in return for taking the cap hit! That is definately not taking the high road by Brett and his agent, it is called selfishness.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 15^th, 2008, 7:09pm

on 07/15/08 at 06:33:01, Philly wrote:

That's simply not where we are at this point. That's to work backwards... into the land of "coulda, shoulda, woulda". Upon further review, Favre wants to play. He doesn't want to be retired. It's seems like a reasonable reconsidered conclusion. I admit that Favre has done a good job of botching this up (PR-wise). Whether or not he did the (morally) "wrong" thing, I am not to judge. The guy wants to play football, period. Why take that away from him? We are talking about what a fellow human being wants to do with his life. If you take him at his word, he simply had a change of heart... Surely reasonable and plausible! In any event, moving forward, not looking backward, I'm just pointing out the guy here in a position to do the stand-up thing and stating what that stand-up move would be, a perspective and voice, to my knowledge, missing in the media's discussion of this matter. Being the bigger man, taking the higher road, doing the stand-up thing, etc., etc. is by definition to make up for a wrong or something done wrong or something gone about poorly or incorrectly. Why would you even want to make an argument for someone not to be the bigger man and do the stand-up thing? Mind you, I wouldn't blame the guy for not taking this action (such a move seems almost unthinkable, if not downright anathema, in America anymore). That's why it is called the higher road, the road less traveled, surely not a source of derision if not taken. So, please think of what I am suggesting in that context. :)

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Jul 15^th, 2008, 10:42pm

Rodgers has no say in any of this. He can't just tell management that he wants to be a nice guy and let Brett change his mind about playing and starting. Rodgers is a pro, and he will work as hard as he can and will play where he's told to play.

As for the Packers, the NFL is a business. They did a lot of work for life after Brett. If they choose to start Rodgers, it's a business decision.

Favre is simply trying to put public opinion in as a bargaining chip to get what he wants. That's just a business decision, too. No better, no worse.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by DB on Jul 15^th, 2008, 10:54pm

I just don't see why the Packers do not jump at the chance to take Farve back after what he did last year. This isn't T-ball where everyone should get a chance to play. The question is ... are the Packers better off with Farve or without him. I think the answer is obvious.

Maybe Rodgers will be good, maybe he won't. Who care about wasting a second round pick. Farve is an All-Time great who should have the green light to play so long as he is playing at a certain level, which he certainly exceeds at this point.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 15^th, 2008, 11:29pm

on 07/15/08 at 22:42:11, Callie wrote:

I'm going to respond to this the same way I did to an earlier post of Phil's... [smiley=zenmaster.gif]

on 07/14/08 at 23:23:57, StegRock wrote:

Well, if that's the case, that's just messed up.

To me, it just seems to be forsaking a (possible) solution. I do wonder... [smiley=uh.gif] Where is the rulebook that's being consulted here? I don't get it. I mean... Don't get me wrong... I'm not saying you all's observations aren't right. I'm just saying... Why put unnecessary strictures on decisions, moreover, ones that serve as an impediment to real(-life) solutions? And, then, why waste time discussing, perhaps not the obvious, but the usual while dismissing the "alternative" so quickly (no less by beating it over the head with the usual)?

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 16^th, 2008, 12:02am

on 07/15/08 at 22:54:46, DB wrote:

BINGO

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Jul 16^th, 2008, 12:12am

on 07/15/08 at 22:54:46, DB wrote:

I'm certainly no Favre fan, but I agree with you that the Packers should do what's best for the Packers - and will certainly try to do that. I'm just not so sure what is best for the Packers.

I got this in my inbox today:
http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2291_Favre_fans_give_love_a_bad_name.html

Here is the part that applies to what we're saying (with humor, of course ;D ):

The lovesick Favre fan believes: Favre gives the Packers the best chance to win this year
The emotionless Cold, Hard Football Facts: Prove that this is a completely indefensible argument.

Fans may think the Packers will be better with Favre in the line-up. They may in fact be correct. But the truth is that this is merely a guess. Nobody knows if the Packers will be better off in 2008 with the 39-year-old Favre than with 25-year-old former No. 1 draft pick Rodgers.

Sure, Favre had a great season in 2007. But he also was among the worst quarterbacks in football in 2005 and 2006. His 29 picks in 2005, for example, were among the highest single-season totals in history and most by a QB since 1988.

So if Favre of 2007 shows up in 2008, then yes, maybe the Packers would be better with him in the line-up. But if Favre 2005 (70.9 passer rating) or 2006 (72.7 passer rating) showed up in 2008, the Packers certainly would be better with Rodgers in the line-up, unless he proved a complete bust.

As sports talk host Homer True said to us during one of our recent spots in ESPN Milwaukee, there can't be much of a difference between the average Favre season in recent years and the likely production by Rodgers.

But at the end, again, we don't know. The argument that the Packers will be better off with Favre is nothing more than a blind, rickety guess by the football forlorn of Green Bay, with no factual foundation to support it.

The lovesick Favre fan believes: The Packers "owe" Favre another shot because he gave so much to the team.
The emotionless Cold, Hard Football Facts: Show that nobody owes anybody anything.

The fact that some lovesick Favre fans believe the Packers "owe" him proves that they inhabit an irrational plane of existence.

Favre was paid quite handsomely for his years at the helm. He received great wealth, fame and praise. And then he decided to call it quits. As far as we can see, everybody's all square.

Plus, "another shot" for Favre creates "another problem" for the Packers. If they caved to fan pressure, they'd simply open themselves up to another year of will-he or won't-he speculation that has embarrassed the organization for the past four years. Do we really need to go through the same old song and dance again in 2009?

After all, we've now seen that even if Favre "retires" (again) in 2009, he may continue to haunt us and thhe Packers. Someone's gotta call an end to this poisonous relationship. And the Packers have done it.

The lovesick Favre fan believes: The organization can't go on without their man.
The emotionless Cold, Hard Football Facts: Prove that, like a Gloria Gaynor of the gridirion, the Packers will survive.

Let's put it this way: if the 49ers could survive without Joe Montana, a far superior performer to Favre who led his organization to greater glory than Favre, than the Packers can certainly continue to compete without No. 4.

Sure, Rodgers may not prove to be half the player as Steve Young, the Hall of Famer who replaced Montana.

But one way or the other, you have to find out what kind of performer you have in your former No. 1 pick. And you won't find out with Rodgers sitting on the bench. And the sooner he plays, the sooner the Packers get their answer.

Either way, folks, the planet continues to spin and the game goes on. Hell, using the logic of the lovelorn Packers fan, Sammy Baugh should still be taking snaps for the Redskins. Folks in D.C. loved him, after all.

And, as we've already seen, the risk of losing Favre is pretty low: there's no reason to believe the Packers will be better this year with Favre than they will be without him.

But with twisted logic, sad-sack Packers fans have shown more commitment to a single player than to the entire organization, hopelessly devoted to a past that, as you'll see below, is not nearly as glorious as they've made it out to be in their minds.

The lovesick Favre fan believes: The Packers are poised for a Super Bowl run and Favre could be the difference.
The emotionless Cold, Hard Football Facts: Laugh in the face of this nonsense.

As far as we can tell, and correct us if we're wrong, Favre has quarterbacked the Packers for 16 years. Those 16 years have resulted in two Super Bowl appearances and one Super Bowl victory … both more than a decade ago.

There's simply no reason to believe that 2008 would be any different than every year from 1998 to 2007, when the Packers did not reach the Super Bowl with Favre at the helm.

But that's only part of the story. More often than not, Favre was a major reason the Packers failed to at least reach a Super Bowl when they had teams good enough to get there.

The 2001 Packers went 12-4 and were one of the best teams in football. The season came to a crushing halt with a 45-17 loss to the 14-2 Rams in the divisional playoffs. Favre was nearly singularly responsible for the defeat, throwing 6 INTs and tying a playoff record for picks last achieved by Norm Van Brocklin in 1955.

The 2002 Packers again went 12-4 and were one of the best teams in football. The season came to a crushing halt with a 27-7 loss at home to the 9-6-1 wildcard Falcons. It was Green Bay’s first ever home playoff loss and, again, Favre was largely responsible for the defeat with one of his worst performances of the season, completing 20 of 42 passes (47.6%) for 247 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT and a 54.4 passer rating.

The 2007 Packers went 13-3 and were again one of the best teams in football. Favre even had one of the best seasons of his Hall of Fame career. Yet the season came to a crushing 23-20 home loss to the 10-6 wildcard Giants. Favre again contributed greatly to the loss, throwing a - surprise! - critical pick on the second play of overtime that directly led to New York’s game-winning field goal.

The lovesick Favre fan believes: The "glory days" will come screeching to a halt without Favre.
The emotionless Cold, Hard Football Facts: Prove the good ol' days weren't always good and tomorrow's not as bad as it seems.

Favre is a great quarterback. One of the best to play the game. His teams were consistently competitive, as evidenced by the one losing campaign and 11 postseason appearances during his 16 years at the helm. Both of these are notable accomplishments.

But the Favre years were not nearly as great in as they've been made out to be in the minds of lovesick Packers fans. Seriously, what are they lamenting?

The truth is that, the Packers, while consistently competitive, have not achieved anything of historic note under Favre.

Sure, Favre helped lead the Packers to a Super Bowl title in 1996. But over the same 16 Favre years (1992-2007) Troy Aikman's Cowboys and Tom Brady's Patriots each won three Super Bowls. John Elway's Broncos won two. The Young-led 49ers, Warner-led Rams, Dilfer-led Ravens, Johnson-led Buccaneers, Roethlisberger-led Steelers, Peyton-led Colts and Eli-led Giants have all won as many Super Bowls as the Favre-led Packers since 1992 ... one.

In fact, if we're being brutally honest here (and brutal honesty is a Cold, Hard Football Facts specialty), the most historic accomplishment in the Favre years was the destruction of the legend of Lambeau Field.

The famed "Frozen Tundra" of the NFL's coldest arena once struck fear in the hearts of opponents. From Green Bay's first home playoff game in 1939, all the way through 2001, the Packers never lost a playoff game at Lambeau Field. Now, even wildcard Southern dome teams no longer fear a playoff visit to Lambeau.

The magic of Lambeau is dead. Favre helped kill it.

Green Bay is 2-3 in its last five home playoff games. Both victories came over the Seahawks of the pathetic NFC West. The losses were to Atlanta, a wildcard dome team, in 2002; Minnesota, a wildcard dome team, in 2004; and the Giants, a wildcard team, in 2007. Favre tossed 4 TDs and 8 INTs in those three losses, with an average passer rating of 60.2.

That's a pretty painful end to one of the great indomitable legends of pro football, the magic of the Frozen Tundra of Lambeau Field.

But it seems, for Favre fans, that love hurts.

They ended the article with a youtube like to "Love Hurts" by Nazareth. ;D

I personally think that it would have been better for Favre to retire a god and go into broadcasting.

And do not ask me about "Glory Days" - I both live in New Jersey (Springfield land) and I'm a Raider fan (what happened to them??). ;D

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 16^th, 2008, 12:22am

on 07/15/08 at 22:42:11, Callie wrote:

it's a business decision.

If it's business, it's bad business. You've got a Hall-of-Famer QB that still has alot left in the tank. He's beloved by Green Bay fan's. He' respected by most fan's of the game. He has been the face of the Packers for almost 2 decades. He is not only a team leader but a leader throughout the NFL. He's an Iron Man.....excuse me...he's THE Iron Man of the NFL. He is one of the most recognized professional football player in the world. He was in the Top 5 in every QB stat last season and he's an old man!! Usually when you speak about legends of the game, their careers have been long over...Favre is a legend who still could easily have 2 good years, 8,000 yards, and 50 TD's left in his arm for crying out loud!! This is his team, if the management doesn't want to do business with him, then they are not very good businessmen. I have not even mentioned that he is completely healthy! What more needs to be said?

Just read this after I posted it....I sound like a Favre-lovin' Madden!!!!! ;D

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Jul 16^th, 2008, 12:53am

on 07/16/08 at 00:22:57, MordecaiCourage wrote:

Just read this after I posted it....I sound like a Favre-lovin' Madden!!!!! ;D

[smiley=rollinwithlaughter.gif] [smiley=rollinwithlaughter.gif] [smiley=rollinwithlaughter.gif] [smiley=rollinwithlaughter.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 16^th, 2008, 4:11am

I don't know what to make of that all-over-the-place e-mail you received, Callie,... BUT, if this is (just) a business decision as you say...

on 07/15/08 at 22:42:11, Callie wrote:

... it's a business decision.

... then, like MC, to me this is the bottom line...

on 07/15/08 at 22:54:46, DB wrote:

[smiley=bullseye.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 18^th, 2008, 5:23pm

Just want to keep this thread updated as regards where things "officially" stand on the Favre front... From "The REAL Feed":

Vikings, NFL won't discuss Favre tampering charge (http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/sports/pro/football&sa=NFL&eid=3493559)
KABC: Sports (18.07.2008 08:44)

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 20^th, 2008, 7:56am

Here's, I think, an intriguing question to ponder... First, the set-up... Most of the big-name players that switched teams late in their careers that come to mind ended up on "innocuous" teams vis-a-vis the team they made their names with: Montana to the Chiefs, Namath to the Rams, and so on... If Favre ends up going to the RIVAL Vikings for, let's say, a couple years and has success, moreover, at the expense of the Packers, would it at all taint or even potentially ruin his legacy with the Pack??? [smiley=thinking.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 23^rd, 2008, 6:25am

Here's the latest dirt on the Favre sitch according to this LOCAL daily available on "The REAL Feed":

As the Favre turns: Latest twist has NFL visiting Winter Park (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/25784219.html?location_refer=Sports:highlightModules:2)
StarTribune: Sports (23.07.2008 01:19)
As league security dropped by Vikings headquarters, an ESPN report said that Brett Favre "clearly prefers to play for the Vikings."

How do you Packer Backers feel about that quote there...[smiley=yikes.gif]???

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 25^th, 2008, 9:57pm

on 07/23/08 at 06:25:18, StegRock wrote:

I'd love to see him finish a Packer, but I am intrigued to see what he can do somewhere else......Minnesota does bother me a bit admittedly, but it is probably his best opportunity to win. It would be sweet justice to those who are on Favre's side, to see him go there and win. In the big picture though, I'd root against Minny beating GB, while hoping the Minny loss wouldn't be because of Farve!! Make sense?? I'm torn like most Cheeseheads!

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 26^th, 2008, 12:02pm

on 07/20/08 at 07:56:12, StegRock wrote:

would it at all taint or even potentially ruin his legacy with the Pack??? [smiley=thinking.gif]

Taint.....[smiley=yes.gif]

Ruin..... [smiley=no.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Jul 27^th, 2008, 9:55pm

First day of camp... update on Favre... from "The REAL Feed":

Report: Favre will stay away for now (http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=sportsnetwork&page=nfl/news/news.aspx?id=4167789)
The Sports Network: NFL (27.07.2008 10:52)

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Aug 2^nd, 2008, 11:30pm

Update on a couple [smiley=key.gif] fronts... from "The REAL Feed (http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/newsstand.htm)":

Grant IN...

RB Grant reportedly signs four-year deal with Pack (http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=sportsnetwork&page=nfl/news/news.aspx?id=4169243)
The Sports Network: NFL (02.08.2008 22:10)

Favre in limbo, but the "highest powers in the land" want a verdict SOON...

Commissioner Goodell wants Favre, Packers dispute solved by Monday (http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Football/NFL/2008/08/02/6339351-ap.html)
SLAM! Sports NFL (02.08.2008 20:58)
GREEN BAY, Wis. - NFL commissioner Roger Goodell hopes to have Brett Favre's standoff with the Green Bay Packers resolved by Monday - even if he has to force the issue.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Aug 3^rd, 2008, 6:32pm

It appears that common ground... and common sense were finally found... From "The REAL Feed":

PACKERS CONFIRM FAVRE'S RETURN (http://www.sportinglife.com/nfl/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=American_Football/08/08/03/GRIDIRON_USA-Favre_2nd_Nightlead.html)
Sporting Life: NFL (03.08.2008 17:10)
Brett Favre will be reinstated and added to the Green Bay Packers' roster on Monday.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Aug 3^rd, 2008, 8:45pm

No sense at all. If the NFL isn't forced to implement a "Favre Rule" that prohibits successful players from running blackmail games like this, we'll see more and more players doing more and more of the same.

Way to try to destroy the sport that made you rich, Brett. What a selfish, Narcissistic moron.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Aug 3^rd, 2008, 9:32pm

on 08/03/08 at 20:45:09, Callie wrote:

No sense at all. If the NFL isn't forced to implement a "Favre Rule" that prohibits successful players from running blackmail games like this...

Way to try to destroy the sport that made you rich, Brett. What a selfish, Narcissistic moron.

I obviously do not share this viewpoint,... but I'm willing to hear it out (since it seems prevailing)... I'd like to hear the specific thought-process behind the claim of blackmail and narcissism... [smiley=shrug.gif] I mean... I "get it" generally, but not with the according amount of specificity I feel a harsh claim as such necessitates. :-/

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Aug 3^rd, 2008, 10:18pm

Here is the history:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8339726/Packers-detail-timeline-of-Favre's-decisions#

After this, Favre waffles between the pay-off to stay out of the NFC North and being given a bribe to just retire already. Trade offers come in, but not from teams Brett wants to play for. How many players get to demand which team they will be traded to? Why does he think that he runs the Packer head office along with the coaching staff?

If I were a Packer share holder, I'd want Brett's severed head on a pike.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Aug 3^rd, 2008, 10:57pm

[smiley=popcorn.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Aug 4^th, 2008, 4:19pm

:-/ I'm sorry I just don't buy all the inuendo of insidiousness. I just think this all unfolded much less calculatedly than the "conspiracists" would have us believe and much more innocently simply with ALL options for Favre to play again being explored. [smiley=shrug.gif] Call me a trusting fool... [smiley=dunce.gif]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Aug 4^th, 2008, 7:02pm

Favre's first day back... under the radar according to "The REAL Feed":

Favre flying under radar in Green Bay on Monday (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/wires/08/04/2020.ap.fbn.packers.favre.2nd.ld.writethru.0901/index.html)
SI.com: NFL (04.08.2008 18:34)

Meeting with the QB's scheduled, though:

McCarthy slated to meet with Favre, Packers QBs (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3519067&campaign=rss&source=NFLHeadlines)
ESPN: NFL (04.08.2008 16:49)
Green Bay Packers head coach Mike McCarthy was scheduled to meet with his quarterbacks -- including the reinstated Brett Favre -- on Monday as the team begins dealing with Favre's return to training camp.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Callie on Aug 5^th, 2008, 10:42pm

on 08/04/08 at 16:19:42, StegRock wrote:

Call me a trusting fool... [smiley=dunce.gif]

OK. You're a trusting fool.

I liked this one from pft:

Quote:

Here's what, based on our discussions with league insiders, we think McCarthy would have said, if he had opted for candor:

"Now you guys have finally gotten a taste of what we've been dealing with the past few years. Brett Favre can't make up his damn mind. Ted Thompson and I decided after we both got contract extensions that now is the time to quit kissing Brett's ass, in the hopes that he'd just go away. And so he went away and we moved on and now he wants to dictate where he's going to play and he used the possibility of forcing his way back onto the Packers as a way to get what he wants. We're not going to release him, but we'll do everything we can to trade him to a team that's not in the NFC North."

[smiley=cheesehead.gif] [smiley=LMFAO.gif]

In reality, though, you have to admit that Brett did what he could to force his will on the Packers and the rest of the NFL. The League gave the Packers and Favre some time to work things out before reinstating Favre. ONCE HE WAS REINSTATED, he was under his existing contract with the Packers. At that point, he did not have the right to demand where he would be traded, just like anyone else under a contract like his.

Why should the Packers be forced to trade Favre to another NFC North team? Why did Favre think he is so special that everyone else worked for him?

It was contrived by Brett and Bus. But it looks to me like the Packers refused to be bullied and at the same time gave Favre a whole lot of back doors to save face. Brett was just too arrogant to take that gift. He thought he could push everybody around instead.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Philly on Aug 6^th, 2008, 9:28am

Caught part of an interview with Jay Glazer (Fox Sports) on the ESPN Mike and Mike show this morning and Glazer brought up a v-e-r-y interesting point.

Two and three years ago, Brett Favre was stinking up the joint, trying to break every interception record ever set. Last year he played much, much better than he had in the previous years. The difference? The years that he stank, he did little in the off-season. Before the 2007 season, though, the team hooked him up with an elite personal trainer and Favre reported in outstanding shape, ready to perform.

Now, move forward to this off-season. He's spent much of it retired, probably catching up on those short stacks at IHOP. Then he decides to unretire and starts working out with... (gasp!)... a high school team. He's throwing passes to 5' 6" receivers who run 5.6 forties. His timing has to be off... his conditioning is likely not where it should be... and his mind?

Seriously, I wouldn't touch Favre with a 10-foot pole if I was the Jets, Vikes, or Bucs (or anyone else). He's setting himself up for one of the most disastrous comebacks in NFL history.

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Aug 14^th, 2008, 10:24pm

[offtopic]This is after the fact, but just for the record, given my stance on what Rodgers could have done to ease this situation with Favre,... I want it to be known that I also thought Favre had a "high road" in front of him that he didn't take. Give me a break with all that "respect" yadda-yadda. He should have understood that having to win his job back, as if that wouldn't have happened, was the relatively small price he had to pay for his indecisiveness and retiring and unretiring. He should just count his blessings that he works in one of the few industries on the planet that have the room for such indecision. Tell me what other job you can retire from and then return, no less with open arms, to four months later, moreover, after they've already found your replacement. Of course, I'm sure Thompson and the Packers didn't display the requisite wisdom to approach the situation with such philosophical tact. At the end of the day, all parties involved blew it. Given the opportunity to do the wrong thing, people will!!! Oh, well.... C'est la vie, right?[/offtopic]

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by Whammer on Aug 24^th, 2008, 4:30am

WOW! Just logged back on since losing last season and have been reading all the replies to the Brett Favre saga.

As a life long Packer fan and a huge Favre fan...I couldn't be happier. Brett can expand his fan base and the Packers can prove that they can win without Favre or NOT?

Time will tell...meantime...I've purchased my jets tickets and now have a team on that other side to cheer. A Packers-vs-Jets SB???? Hey I guy can dream yeah!

Title: Re: Packers Offseason Report
Post by StegRock on Aug 25^th, 2008, 3:00am

Heya, ChadMaster... [smiley=welcome.gif] back, my friend! Still busy out of our minds... Classes start tomorrow morning early... [smiley=zenmaster.gif] Will follow up later! Thanks for dropping by and posting, though... [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

...

In any event, some good news for the Pack... currently tops "The REAL Feed":

Packers RB Grant returns to practice (http://www.nfl.com/news/story;jsessionid=D4C7788711663B931D1158DC2E25BAA9?id=09000d5d80a420f6&template=with-video&confirm=true)
NFL.com (25.08.2008 01:55)
Packers running back Ryan Grant returned to practice today after missing the first three exhibition games, but a dozen of his teammates are still hurting.