PDA

View Full Version : How about this one?



Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 03:40 AM
So let's put this in a little different perspective and remove our emotional attachment to this situation. Since some of us love Favre for what he's done for our team and some of you obviously hate Favre, which blows my F'n mind. What if Barry Sanders had changed his mind a couple months after he retired. Should they have stuck with their plans and let Greg Hill be their man, because he was next in line?? Or should they have manned up and allowed Barry to come back, even though it might hurt Greg Hill's feelings a little bit?? Give your honest opinion, don't let your hate for Favre influence your thoughts on this question.

darwin31
07-16-2008, 05:30 AM
First of all, you cant ask people to leave their emotions out of answering your question when your entire post is filled with your emotions.

Second, you cant relate the two as it would not be so bad to bring Sanders back as they could share the load of total carries. Unless of course you are talking about both Favre and Rodgers rotating in and out of the huddle.

SamG187
07-16-2008, 05:34 AM
I understand where your going with it and believe me I want Favre back, but thats pretty monday morning quarterbacking because obviously we know that that didnt work out for the Lions and we don't know that A rod is going to flop

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 05:50 AM
First of all, you cant ask people to leave their emotions out of answering your question when your entire post is filled with your emotions.

Second, you cant relate the two as it would not be so bad to bring Sanders back as they could share the load of total carries. Unless of course you are talking about both Favre and Rodgers rotating in and out of the huddle.

Pretty much my thoughts exactly. Greg Hill was not drafted by the Lions and set up to be the long term successor. He was acquired to fill the hole. Completely different. Rodgers became the starter the moment Favre retired and the team is not looking back.

And as darwin said running backs can share the load. Quarterbacks cannot.

ugottabjoshinme
07-16-2008, 08:52 AM
Pretty much my thoughts exactly. Greg Hill was not drafted by the Lions and set up to be the long term successor. He was acquired to fill the hole. Completely different. Rodgers became the starter the moment Favre retired and the team is not looking back.

And as darwin said running backs can share the load. Quarterbacks cannot.

I agree completely, the comparison is not really at all valid.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 11:19 AM
First of all, you cant ask people to leave their emotions out of answering your question when your entire post is filled with your emotions.

Second, you cant relate the two as it would not be so bad to bring Sanders back as they could share the load of total carries. Unless of course you are talking about both Favre and Rodgers rotating in and out of the huddle.

Nobody shares carries with Barry. That's like asking Favre to be a backup, oh wait.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 11:21 AM
Pretty much my thoughts exactly. Greg Hill was not drafted by the Lions and set up to be the long term successor. He was acquired to fill the hole. Completely different. Rodgers became the starter the moment Favre retired and the team is not looking back.

And as darwin said running backs can share the load. Quarterbacks cannot.

Yeah but when he signed, he signed as the starter, or he would have signed somewhere else had he known Barry was coming back. What about him?? If no one player is above the team, why would Barry be able to come back and screw this guy over? Just because we spent a draft pick on Rodgers, he automatically gets the starting job without earning it?

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 11:35 AM
Yeah but when he signed, he signed as the starter, or he would have signed somewhere else had he known Barry was coming back. What about him?? If no one player is above the team, why would Barry be able to come back and screw this guy over? Just because we spent a draft pick on Rodgers, he automatically gets the starting job without earning it?

How the hell is he supposed to "Earn it" if he's never allowed to play? If you want to keep handing Favre the job every year there's not a lot of room for Aaron to earn anything.

beast
07-16-2008, 11:41 AM
Yeah but when he signed, he signed as the starter, or he would have signed somewhere else had he known Barry was coming back. What about him?? If no one player is above the team, why would Barry be able to come back and screw this guy over? Just because we spent a draft pick on Rodgers, he automatically gets the starting job without earning it?

I don't remember reading, anyone posting Barry would " be able to come back and screw this guy over". Maybe i missed it, or it's more of your emotional attachment, which is yet to be removed.

I feel the same way, with every single player. Every single player should have to compete for their spot every single year. Including HOF and the guys coming back from retirement.

Greenngld
07-16-2008, 11:45 AM
Two totally different situations.

RB and QB are too different to compare. Also, Rodgers was given the job outright, preparing with the team, and the future of the organization. Greg Hill was a journeyman RB never getting 700 yards in a season.

Sanders was still pretty much at the top of his game. Regardless of what happens, we all know Brett is coming to the end soon. Sanders also did not do the same thing yearly and would not have handled himself like Brett is, I don't think.

I love Brett, always will. However he has handled this as poorly as possible imo. He has built up so much love and goodwill over the years, but he has just about cashed it all in at this point with many fans. Even in the latest interview he shows his arrogance. He wanted Moss, he wanted Wahle and Rivera, he wanted a different coach. Those aren't his calls and it is not his place to say.

Are the Packers better off in 2009 with Brett? Possibly, but not for sure. Is a GMs job to build a team for 1 year or for the future? Both I think, and the Packers are still one of the youngest teams in the NFL. How does it affect the future with players knowing Rodgers was given the job and then it was pulled from him? Who knows, but it could be a big deal. If Brett comes back, is Rodgers done in GB...probably and the time and draft pick put into him are all lost. Rodgers does have strong support with his teammates and much better interaction with the team. Brett did not have "social skills" with the younger players and even dressed in his own locker room.

If Brett didn't "retire" would he be the starter? No doubt. If he unretired a couple months ago would he be the starter? No doubt. But he didn't do either. He put himself in this situation and the team.

Do you really think TT went to Brett's home to ask if he wanted his locker shipped there? Hell no, he was trying to feel Brett out and give him a last minute option to say what he was thinking.

I don't hold TT without blame. But most of his errors have been since Brett made his "demand" to come back known. Even now he is leaving the door open, but Brett can't see that. If he comes back, he will start. No way will he sit on the bench. But he is taking it in a direction that it can't go. He will not get released, and probably won't get traded. TT is a smart man, he knows Bretts value is low because he is backed in a corner. If he trades Brett for a 3rd round pick and Brett does good, TT is gone. If he releases him, same thing. If he sits on the bench, Rodgers will have so much pressure, there is no way he will perform to his abilities. Plus, MM makes the decisions on who starts.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 11:52 AM
I don't remember reading, anyone posting Barry would " be able to come back and screw this guy over". Maybe i missed it, or it's more of your emotional attachment, which is yet to be removed.

I feel the same way, with every single player. Every single player should have to compete for their spot every single year. Including HOF and the guys coming back from retirement.

So your saying the Lions should have not taken Barry back if he had wanted to come back?

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 11:54 AM
So your saying the Lions should have not taken Barry back if he had wanted to come back?

Where did he say that? I believe he said he should have to compete for the job if he came back.

Another huge difference you are not getting here is the age factor. Sanders still had a few good years to give if he had come back. Favre commits to one year at a time.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 11:54 AM
Two totally different situations.

RB and QB are too different to compare. Also, Rodgers was given the job outright, preparing with the team, and the future of the organization. Greg Hill was a journeyman RB never getting 700 yards in a season.

Sanders was still pretty much at the top of his game. Regardless of what happens, we all know Brett is coming to the end soon. Sanders also did not do the same thing yearly and would not have handled himself like Brett is, I don't think.

I love Brett, always will. However he has handled this as poorly as possible imo. He has built up so much love and goodwill over the years, but he has just about cashed it all in at this point with many fans. Even in the latest interview he shows his arrogance. He wanted Moss, he wanted Wahle and Rivera, he wanted a different coach. Those aren't his calls and it is not his place to say.

Are the Packers better off in 2009 with Brett? Possibly, but not for sure. Is a GMs job to build a team for 1 year or for the future? Both I think, and the Packers are still one of the youngest teams in the NFL. How does it affect the future with players knowing Rodgers was given the job and then it was pulled from him? Who knows, but it could be a big deal. If Brett comes back, is Rodgers done in GB...probably and the time and draft pick put into him are all lost. Rodgers does have strong support with his teammates and much better interaction with the team. Brett did not have "social skills" with the younger players and even dressed in his own locker room.

If Brett didn't "retire" would he be the starter? No doubt. If he unretired a couple months ago would he be the starter? No doubt. But he didn't do either. He put himself in this situation and the team.

Do you really think TT went to Brett's home to ask if he wanted his locker shipped there? Hell no, he was trying to feel Brett out and give him a last minute option to say what he was thinking.

I don't hold TT without blame. But most of his errors have been since Brett made his "demand" to come back known. Even now he is leaving the door open, but Brett can't see that. If he comes back, he will start. No way will he sit on the bench. But he is taking it in a direction that it can't go. He will not get released, and probably won't get traded. TT is a smart man, he knows Bretts value is low because he is backed in a corner. If he trades Brett for a 3rd round pick and Brett does good, TT is gone. If he releases him, same thing. If he sits on the bench, Rodgers will have so much pressure, there is no way he will perform to his abilities. Plus, MM makes the decisions on who starts.

That is not why TT came to Favre's house. Favre says he told him that day that he might decide in June to come back, and to have a plan in case he does. TT said he was cool with it. Well it doesn't seem like TT still has a plan for this mess. TT is blowing smoke up everyone's *** and trying to damage Favre's reputation. Wake the F up. Did you watch the interviews?? Did you read what was left out of the interview?

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 11:58 AM
That is not why TT came to Favre's house. Favre says he told him that day that he might decide in June to come back, and to have a plan in case he does. TT said he was cool with it. Well it doesn't seem like TT still has a plan for this mess. TT is blowing smoke up everyone's *** and trying to damage Favre's reputation. Wake the F up. Did you watch the interviews?? Did you read what was left out of the interview?

So wait, according to your logic and others we shouldn't believe TT, but should take what Favre says as gospel despite the fact that he lied about being done and having nothing left to give?

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 12:01 PM
It's been obvious to me well before Favre said it, that this has been going on. When TT does an interview, maybe we'll believe what he has to say, but he ain't sayin nuthin. All he did was have MM's friend Jay Glazer leak a rumor that Favre had wanted to come back in March, but we don't know anything about that, because TT has never commented about it. When Thompson does an interview explaining his side of the story, I'll consider it. Until then, it's pretty obvious what is going on, and Favre just confirmed it.

beast
07-16-2008, 12:02 PM
So your saying the Lions should have not taken Barry back if he had wanted to come back?

No, I'm saying if Sander came back, the Lions should of taken him, and let him compete for his spot on the roster. If he only "wanted" to come back, which is the word you used, the Lions shouldn't have done anything, because Sanders like Favre right now is currently retired.

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 12:02 PM
It's been obvious to me well before Favre said it, that this has been going on. When TT does an interview, maybe we'll believe what he has to say, but he ain't sayin nuthin. All he did was have MM's friend Jay Glazer leak a rumor that Favre had wanted to come back in March, but we don't know anything about that, because TT has never commented about it. When Thompson does an interview explaining his side of the story, I'll consider it. Until then, it's pretty obvious what is going on, and Favre just confirmed it.

Again, you're just seeing it this way because of your unbreakable emotional attachment to Favre. He could burn down an orphanage and you'd probably blame Ted Thompson for making him all stressed out.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 12:03 PM
If Barry Sanders wanted to come back now, the Lions should take him back.

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 12:03 PM
If Barry Sanders wanted to come back now, the Lions should take him back.

Come back now?? You realize he's 40 right?

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 12:05 PM
Come back now?? You realize he's 40 right?

It's a joke, I suppose I should break it down for you every time I try to use humor in here. Maybe I'll write things in italics just for you when they're meant to be a joke.

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 12:05 PM
And your only seeing it your way because of your fetish for men with white hair.

More like my fetish for a successful franchise not run by people like you that would want to make rash and stupid decisions based on their emotions.

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 12:06 PM
It's a joke, I suppose I should break it down for you every time I try to use humor in here. Maybe I'll write things in italics just for you when they're meant to be a joke.

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that most people would not have seen that as a joke considering there was not even a slight indication that it was. It's not my fault you suck at sarcasm.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 12:06 PM
Team would be more successful with Favre, so obviously your not too into that.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 12:07 PM
I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that most people would not have seen that as a joke considering there was not even a slight indication that it was. It's not my fault you suck at sarcasm.

I think anyone who has any sense of humor whatsoever would realize that I was exaggerating with that post. Sorry your unable to comprehend humor and sarcasm, I'll keep that in mind for future posts.

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 12:10 PM
I think anyone who has any sense of humor whatsoever would realize that I was exaggerating with that post. Sorry your unable to comprehend humor and sarcasm, I'll keep that in mind for future posts.

No you should just keep in mind that you're not funny, and do everybody a favor by never attempting to be again.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 12:14 PM
Well if that's the case, keep in mind that your not very smart, and you should not attempt to be anymore either.

jwdaly07
07-16-2008, 12:15 PM
Well if that's the case, keep in mind that your not very smart, and you should not attempt to be anymore either.

Hey awesome re-wording of my comment toward you. Very clever how you changed a word.

hughest4
07-16-2008, 12:19 PM
Seriously? Enough with all of this arguing and bickering. I'm going away for a few days so the other mods will be checking up on this forum and they might not be as leinent as i am. I am just letting you guys know because i don't want to see any bans or anything

Greenngld
07-16-2008, 12:23 PM
That is not why TT came to Favre's house. Favre says he told him that day that he might decide in June to come back, and to have a plan in case he does. TT said he was cool with it. Well it doesn't seem like TT still has a plan for this mess. TT is blowing smoke up everyone's *** and trying to damage Favre's reputation. Wake the F up. Did you watch the interviews?? Did you read what was left out of the interview?


I gave you a calm reply to your question, explaining why I thought that, and your response is wake the f up? Cute. And you say Favre "told him to have a plan"...my point exactly, why should Brett tell TT what to do. You think he should because he is Brett Favre.

If the locker isn't why he went there why does Favre say

""So he shows up, I think it was Tuesday around noon, maybe it was Monday, I can't remember the exact date, but it was a couple days later. We make small talk for 45 minutes. How did the drive go? What about your guys? Pretty good. And then it kind of gets quiet and...- I'm thinking to myself, here we go.

"'You think it would be OK if we dismantled your locker and sent it to you?' 'I guess, Ted, you know. Don't know what I'll do with it, but sure.' I'm thinking surely he didn't fly all the way down here to tell me that and it just kind of gets quiet again and OK, and he says, 'Well, OK, if I want to talk, I guess I'm going to run.'"

Your emotional attachment to Favre does not allow you to think rationally I guess. Unlike you, I can see both sides of the issue. I love Brett, but he does not get a free pass to do whatever and it is OK. He is acting like a spoiled brat, and he has done so since his dad passed away. You really think Irv wouldn't kick Brett in the *** and tell him to knock it off. Well I do, but now he is surrounded by butt kissing idiots like Bus Cook and Scott Favre that think HE is the Packers and makes the rules.

He holds the majority of the blame. Yes I watched and read the interview, or I would not have put things he said in my post. I also saw an interviewer that was spinning Brett's side and asked no hard questions. Why did he pick a news interviewer with a connection to him? Hmmmm.

Did Brett lie when he said he would never play for another team? I guess so. Did Brett lie when he sent texts saying his unretirement was not true...just rumor? Of course not, Brett is a god.

And if Ted had always wanted to get rid of Favre, why did Peter King report this:

One story that's never been fully told is why Favre returned in 2006, after he was convinced he'd thrown his last pass. A good part of the reason was a visit Thompson made to Hattiesburg, urging Favre to play one more year and to give then-rookie coach McCarthy a chance. The Packers, Thompson told Favre, really needed him. And on that spring day in 2006, Favre decided he'd return.

He also writes:

Final point: I keep hearing Favre was pushed into retirement by the Packers demanding an early decision this off-season, or by Thompson not showing him enough love. He might feel that way, but I think it's nonsense. Favre stood up in front of the world six weeks after he played his last game and said he was finished. If he's not, the Packers are not to blame. He is. He'll have to take the consequences for returning, either in Green Bay (where he shouldn't expect a hug from Rodgers) or elsewhere.

They've happily proceeded through the off-season preparing the 24-year-old successor to Favre, Aaron Rodgers, to take his place, and they don't want their grand plan interrupted now. It's quite understandable. Rodgers has shown promise, and the Packers have him signed through the end of the 2009 season. Can you imagine what Rodgers would think if McCarthy came to him this week and said, "I know you've been working hard getting ready to start for us, and we've promised you the starting job, but we're going to bring Brett back for one year. Or two. Or three.'' If I were Rodgers, and I'd already waited through three years without starting a game, and Favre returned, I know what I'd tell McCarthy. That's fine, Mike. But I will never sign another contract with the Packers. After 2009, whatever happens, I'm gone

beast
07-16-2008, 01:02 PM
Team would be more successful with Favre, so obviously your not too into that.

Yeah, but Favre retired. And then has asked for a release, just because he's not named #1. I wonder if Jennings, Jones, and Nelson will ask to be release if their not #1.

Only playing he your #1 doesn't sound like a team guy. Plus all he has to do, is unretire, and beat out Rodgers, who has never started a game, Favre won't be the starter.

ugottabjoshinme
07-16-2008, 01:29 PM
I gave you a calm reply to your question, explaining why I thought that, and your response is wake the f up? Cute. And you say Favre "told him to have a plan"...my point exactly, why should Brett tell TT what to do. You think he should because he is Brett Favre.

If the locker isn't why he went there why does Favre say

""So he shows up, I think it was Tuesday around noon, maybe it was Monday, I can't remember the exact date, but it was a couple days later. We make small talk for 45 minutes. How did the drive go? What about your guys? Pretty good. And then it kind of gets quiet and...- I'm thinking to myself, here we go.

"'You think it would be OK if we dismantled your locker and sent it to you?' 'I guess, Ted, you know. Don't know what I'll do with it, but sure.' I'm thinking surely he didn't fly all the way down here to tell me that and it just kind of gets quiet again and OK, and he says, 'Well, OK, if I want to talk, I guess I'm going to run.'"

Your emotional attachment to Favre does not allow you to think rationally I guess. Unlike you, I can see both sides of the issue. I love Brett, but he does not get a free pass to do whatever and it is OK. He is acting like a spoiled brat, and he has done so since his dad passed away. You really think Irv wouldn't kick Brett in the *** and tell him to knock it off. Well I do, but now he is surrounded by butt kissing idiots like Bus Cook and Scott Favre that think HE is the Packers and makes the rules.

He holds the majority of the blame. Yes I watched and read the interview, or I would not have put things he said in my post. I also saw an interviewer that was spinning Brett's side and asked no hard questions. Why did he pick a news interviewer with a connection to him? Hmmmm.

Did Brett lie when he said he would never play for another team? I guess so. Did Brett lie when he sent texts saying his unretirement was not true...just rumor? Of course not, Brett is a god.

And if Ted had always wanted to get rid of Favre, why did Peter King report this:

One story that's never been fully told is why Favre returned in 2006, after he was convinced he'd thrown his last pass. A good part of the reason was a visit Thompson made to Hattiesburg, urging Favre to play one more year and to give then-rookie coach McCarthy a chance. The Packers, Thompson told Favre, really needed him. And on that spring day in 2006, Favre decided he'd return.

He also writes:

Final point: I keep hearing Favre was pushed into retirement by the Packers demanding an early decision this off-season, or by Thompson not showing him enough love. He might feel that way, but I think it's nonsense. Favre stood up in front of the world six weeks after he played his last game and said he was finished. If he's not, the Packers are not to blame. He is. He'll have to take the consequences for returning, either in Green Bay (where he shouldn't expect a hug from Rodgers) or elsewhere.

They've happily proceeded through the off-season preparing the 24-year-old successor to Favre, Aaron Rodgers, to take his place, and they don't want their grand plan interrupted now. It's quite understandable. Rodgers has shown promise, and the Packers have him signed through the end of the 2009 season. Can you imagine what Rodgers would think if McCarthy came to him this week and said, "I know you've been working hard getting ready to start for us, and we've promised you the starting job, but we're going to bring Brett back for one year. Or two. Or three.'' If I were Rodgers, and I'd already waited through three years without starting a game, and Favre returned, I know what I'd tell McCarthy. That's fine, Mike. But I will never sign another contract with the Packers. After 2009, whatever happens, I'm gone

Absolutely great post!!
You definately need to look at both sides in this. And just because Favre said things in his interview, it doesnt mean that that is the only thing to believe. The reporter was absolutely lobbing him softball questions so that he could make the packers management look like the bad guy. Brett has done some things wrong this offseason. It is just as much his fault that we are in this position. Management is not the only one to blame. I absolutely love Brett, but I do think he handled thiss offseason the wrong way.

Favre Support
07-16-2008, 01:39 PM
I agree he could have done better. No question on that one.

But, there is always one, the situation is now as it is. Now react on it Management. Take him back: fine, more then! If not release him, as he has deserved it for 16 years of giving all he had for the Pack.

TT should not pretend "saving his legacy" by doing what he is so far doing.

Greenngld
07-16-2008, 02:07 PM
I agree he could have done better. No question on that one.

But, there is always one, the situation is now as it is. Now react on it Management. Take him back: fine, more then! If not release him, as he has deserved it for 16 years of giving all he had for the Pack.

TT should not pretend "saving his legacy" by doing what he is so far doing.

I disagree. Releasing Brett is the last thing they should do. Brett played football and got paid very well for it. That is what he "deserved". I think the Packers deserve better for the years, coaching, support, and money they gave Brett. I recall great management support for Brett when he was doing this dance the past years, and dont forget the Vicoden situation where they stood right at his side. Where might Brett be if the Packers didn't take a chance by trading for him? Even after team doctors rejected the trade, and Wolf over-ruled them. Management's job is to look out for the best interests of the team. Do you think releasing Brett, with no compensation, able to go to any team including inter-divisional is the best choice? To anger some of the fan base even more by doing that?

If Brett didn't "retire" would you ever consider just releasing him?

Brett signed a contract to play for the Packers...not start for the Packers unconditionally. He is under that contract, and if he wants to play, he should honor it. I have said before, if Brett comes back to GB, he will not be sitting on the bench. Suck it up, win the job, and move on. That is the cost of making a bad decision to retire. Follow the advice you gave Javon Walker.

We all know this is no win for the Packers. The worst decision is to release him, second worst is to trade him, third worst is to have him come back and compete for the job. The best option would be to convince him to keep his word that sent the Packers down the path they are on now.

And I do love Brett. I am old enough to remember the Randy Wright and Rick Campbell days, but young enough that Brett has been a hero for my whole adult life. But I am able to look at what happened and put my personal feelings aside.

beast
07-16-2008, 03:34 PM
I agree he could have done better. No question on that one.

But, there is always one, the situation is now as it is. Now react on it Management. Take him back: fine, more then! If not release him, as he has deserved it for 16 years of giving all he had for the Pack.

TT should not pretend "saving his legacy" by doing what he is so far doing.

IMO the ball is in Favre court. I think Favre has to decide to

1)un-retire
2)stay retired
3)work with the Packers on a trade, or release agreement