PDA

View Full Version : Favre still out there flinging bombs



beast
07-16-2008, 10:05 PM
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080716/PKR07/80716046/1058/PKR01


Mike Woods column: Favre still out there flinging bombs

July 16, 2008

Over the years, Brett Favre has shown that, when under pressure, he has a propensity to make bad decisions.
Advertisement

His decision to do an interview with Greta Van Susteren was another.

Any chance for reconciliation between one of the team's greatest players and the organization were all but dashed Monday after the first part of a two-part interview that should have been conducted by Mike Wallace.

This wasn't an interview so much as an orchestrated Favre marketing campaign, as he continued to pin blame on others for a decision he alone made.

But along the way he all but called Packers general manager Ted Thompson a liar, expressed distress that Thompson did not follow his advice on personnel decisions apparently he thinks he's the assistant GM and he threw Packers assistant coach and former teammate James Campen under the bus.

That's a lot of bridges burned in a short amount of time.

We will never know the truth in this whole affair. It has dissolved into a He Said/He Said situation, and fans everywhere are left to scratch their heads and try to decide who is being honest and who isn't.

We know Favre hasn't been totally honest. And you can rest assured the Packers, while taking the higher road, have tweaked the truth as well. Let's face it, their statement that they wanted to protect Favre's legacy and then saying he can come back to the team with no guarantees ranks a 10 on the Stupid Meter.

But the thing I find most troubling is Favre's insistence that this whole process was flawed and his persistence on placing accountability on others.

Sure, he has a right to change his mind. But how many times? And why does he believe the world should revolve on his time?

If he didn't want to retire in March, he shouldn't have done it. This idea that he was pressured into a decision is a complete farce. He's a big boy. He should have told the Packers despite their reasonable request to make up his mind by the start of free agency and the draft that he's just not ready.

But he decided to retire, calls them a month later and says he has changed his mind and wants to come back, then changes his mind again and says he'll stay retired.

And the Packers were supposed to just sit with their hands on their laps and wait to see if he changes his mind again? Who does this guy think he is?

Favre could have helped himself by taking more accountability. But instead, he put a self-inflicted wound into his legacy by whining about how Thompson did not follow his personnel suggestions, which is just utterly ridiculous, and then relaying how Campen came to his house and allegedly informed Favre he could do exactly what the Packers administration did not want Favre to do.

He outed his "friend" to his bosses on national television. Who would want him as a teammate now?

I still believe Favre has played his last down in the NFL, a course he alone set into motion. But I really believe the season opener is no longer the time to retire his jersey.

A gaping wound has opened. It will take time to heal much more time than the eight weeks before his jersey is scheduled to be retired.

It's a sad day for Favre and for the Packers organization. But the real sad part is it could, and likely will, get worse.

Mike Woods writes for The Post-Crescent of Appleton. He can be reached at (920) 993-1000, ext. 232, or at mwoods@postcrescent.com.


This seems about right.

newdude
07-16-2008, 10:19 PM
Lame article. Why? From the very start u could see he is against Favre and doesn't make good arguments. He is taking TT's words like it is a gospel and everything Favre does is wrong.

beast
07-16-2008, 11:33 PM
Lame article. Why? From the very start u could see he is against Favre and doesn't make good arguments. He is taking TT's words like it is a gospel and everything Favre does is wrong.

Lame? Maybe, but what it says is true.

newdude
07-17-2008, 12:07 AM
Not necessary true bcuz he's writing what u've been screeching out endlessly :D And it was argued again and again, nothing new is in the article.

wissportsfan
07-17-2008, 12:15 AM
Yeah I kind of like the fact that he chose to talk to her instead of talking to ESPN's Mortensen who actually broke the news.

socalpkrbkr
07-17-2008, 01:14 AM
When I found out that he was ready to comeback and he changed his mind again, it gave me understanding of where the Packers are coming from. Like the article said, the Packers couldn't sit on their hands. They had to move forward. I don't want him in another uni, bottom line, yeah I'm selfish. I really don't think he wants to play for another city, I really don't. So if he doesn't come to camp then he should plan on not planning to play again.

"He should have told the Packers despite their reasonable request to make up his mind by the start of free agency and the draft that he's just not ready."

^That's what I would have done, not in those words but they would get the hint.

newdude
07-17-2008, 01:46 AM
"He should have told the Packers — despite their reasonable request to make up his mind by the start of free agency and the draft — that he's just not ready."

^That's what I would have done, not in those words but they would get the hint.

Favre didn't want to hinder them from drafting for the future so he had to make a quick decision with them rushing him. If he would've ignored them and continued to think about it past FA and draft, there would've been a worse backlash than the one that's going on right now.

Remember he said at that point (March) he wasn't committed and he didn't know if he could commit months from then. So if he woud've chosen to wait it out past the draft and (couldn't commit), then announce his retirement, everyone would blame on him worse then they r doing now.

There's alot of possiblities but the writer should know its easier said then done.

twelvePack
07-17-2008, 01:49 AM
Favre didn't want to hinder them from drafting for the future so he had to make a quick decision with them rushing him. If he would've ignored them and continued to think about it past FA and draft, there would've been a worse backlash than the one that's going on right now.

Remember he said at that point (March) he wasn't committed and he didn't know if he could commit months from then. So if he woud've chosen to wait it out past the draft and (couldn't commit), then announce his retirement, everyone would blame on him worse then they r doing now.

There's alot of possiblities but the writer should know its easier said then done.

This writer probably never played a competitive ****ing game of anything in his life. He is a disgrace, much like his journalism.

Packerbacker
07-17-2008, 10:51 AM
This guy's a *******, he could'nt tell the packers that he was "just not ready" because the packers said they HAD TO HAVE A DECISION BEFORE THE DRAFT!!! I don't know why anyone would not want Brett Favre back, quit drinking the kool aid and come back to reality, Favre= good chance at super bowl, Rodgers= good chance at mediocre. TT blows guys and should be fired very soon. We could've had Moss, Wahle, Rivera and Marriuchi(spelling?) instead we have a ****ty o line and a fat guy whose head is so far up thompson ***
I don't think he has smelt anything besides **** since he got the job. Thompson is a thief and a liar and he must be canned

Ryan Diesel
07-17-2008, 11:12 AM
TT blows guys and should be fired very soon.


I seen him!

SamG187
07-17-2008, 11:18 AM
I seen him!

He's a back alley and a backseat bandit

Packerbacker
07-17-2008, 11:20 AM
:clap: hahahahaha ^. Yep that's him working the glory hole at the I-95 Country Biscuit truck stop. catch him mon-wed and every other Fri. from
9-12.

Ryan Diesel
07-17-2008, 01:16 PM
Dressed up like one of the Golden Girls. Truckers love his silky white hair.

gbaypack31
07-17-2008, 01:19 PM
Favre didn't want to hinder them from drafting for the future so he had to make a quick decision with them rushing him. If he would've ignored them and continued to think about it past FA and draft, there would've been a worse backlash than the one that's going on right now.

Remember he said at that point (March) he wasn't committed and he didn't know if he could commit months from then. So if he woud've chosen to wait it out past the draft and (couldn't commit), then announce his retirement, everyone would blame on him worse then they r doing now.

There's alot of possiblities but the writer should know its easier said then done.

so why is he trying to hinder them now?

newdude
07-17-2008, 01:59 PM
so why is he trying to hinder them now?

Hinder now? Dude, ppl keep talking about the future and the Pack were able to even make it better via draft, so no harm in him "retiring."

Its common sense that Favre gives the Pack the better chance to win, but TT chose Rodgers over him, so it means TT isn't aiming for the SB this year. So how is Favre hindering them now when the GM isn't even aiming for the SB right now. LOLz

Oh, btw, he's just asking to play football again. If this is such a distraction, then maybe its TT's effin job to straight up talk to Favre and hammer it all out.

So stop it with ur "oh he's hindering them now", illogical.

beast
07-17-2008, 02:02 PM
This guy's a *******, he could'nt tell the packers that he was "just not ready" because the packers said they HAD TO HAVE A DECISION BEFORE THE DRAFT!!! I don't know why anyone would not want Brett Favre back, quit drinking the kool aid and come back to reality, Favre= good chance at super bowl, Rodgers= good chance at mediocre. TT blows guys and should be fired very soon. We could've had Moss, Wahle, Rivera and Marriuchi(spelling?) instead we have a ****ty o line and a fat guy whose head is so far up thompson ***
I don't think he has smelt anything besides **** since he got the job. Thompson is a thief and a liar and he must be canned

So because someone told Favre he had to, Favre had to? No plus the draft was more than a month and a half away.

We shouldn't fire anybody. TT is doing his job, what he gets paid to do. And Favre is being a drama queen. Favre come back and earn your spot, and stop being a baby. And we couldn't of had Wahle because he would of taken us over the cap limit thanks to Sherman. Rivera got more money than he should of, and because a lot worse with a lot of injures. And the OL did well great according to stats with pass blocking, and did well once Grant become the starter. Only area were they was bad was 3rd or 4th and short.

newdude
07-17-2008, 02:19 PM
So because someone told Favre he had to, Favre had to? No plus the draft was more than a month and a half away.

We shouldn't fire anybody. TT is doing his job, what he gets paid to do. And Favre is being a drama queen. Favre come back and earn your spot, and stop being a baby. And we couldn't of had Wahle because he would of taken us over the cap limit thanks to Sherman. Rivera got more money than he should of, and because a lot worse with a lot of injures. And the OL did well great according to stats with pass blocking, and did well once Grant become the starter. Only area were they was bad was 3rd or 4th and short.

If he didn't make a decision early, ppl would all go insane and blame him of choking the life out of the Pack and maybe would cause more outrage than now. And he already explained why in the interview, so...

beast
07-17-2008, 02:31 PM
If he didn't make a decision early, ppl would all go insane and blame him of choking the life out of the Pack and maybe would cause more outrage than now. And he already explained why in the interview, so...

I wouldn't be going insane, it would be Brett being Brett like they say for they Red Sox player. And it might of been a lot better. He was getting pressure and could handle it, like in the playoffs when the RB doesn't run for a lot of yards.

newdude
07-17-2008, 02:57 PM
I wouldn't be going insane, it would be Brett being Brett like they say for they Red Sox player. And it might of been a lot better. He was getting pressure and could handle it, like in the playoffs when the RB doesn't run for a lot of yards.

I'm confused by what u wrote.

But u might know the outcome, bcuz we didn't know what was said to Favre and the frequency of it to make him make such a quick decision. Whatever he does, there will be a backlash for it, and ppl already branded him as holding the team back, and it'll be worse. Like I said, he already explained it in the interview...

Packerbacker
07-18-2008, 10:56 AM
TT only concern is himself, He wants to get rid of anybody thats been around since before he came in so that he can build a super bowl team that's made entirely with "His Guy's". Let him go, we can do much better at GM

Packer92
07-18-2008, 11:41 AM
TT only concern is himself, He wants to get rid of anybody thats been around since before he came in so that he can build a super bowl team that's made entirely with "His Guy's". Let him go, we can do much better at GM

So extending Driver, Barnett, Kampman are examples of what then? I think Clifton and Tausher are still on the team. Don't be an idiot, think before you write something. I am a Favre fan, but a Packer fan first!! Brett does not deserve to be handed the starting job back. Rodgers does not deserve to be handed it either, but has earned the right to compete for it. When asked if he would compete for it Brett just said "Why?" What the ****. You retired thats why. If I desided to retire from my job and the company hired my replacement and trained them, and I wanted to come out of retirement would I expect my old job back? NO! And don't tell me it is different, its not, they are both businesses. Even if I was better than the new guy, they could not fire them because I had more experiance. It would be unethical. That being said TT has not handled this well, but Favre has not been much of a help either. Favre should be able to beat our Rodgers if he would be willing to compete. If not, well then the best QB won and that is in the best interest of the team. Also how do you think the locker room would handle Favre coming back straight to starter. Some of the Vets would be fine, but the younger players might have a problem with it. Rodgers has been doing a lot of team building this offseason.

snoman30
07-18-2008, 12:02 PM
We could've had Moss, Wahle, Rivera and Marriuchi(spelling?) instead we have a ****ty o line and a fat guy whose head is so far up thompson ***
I don't think he has smelt anything besides **** since he got the job. Thompson is a thief and a liar and he must be canned

Yet while the fat guy was up Ted's *** we still were able to go the Championship game, where i believe FAVRE blew it. and another thing lets look at the Seahawks game didn't Grant pretty much dominate that game. It's a bunch of BS

Packerbacker
07-19-2008, 05:05 PM
So extending Driver, Barnett, Kampman are examples of what then? I think Clifton and Tausher are still on the team. Don't be an idiot, think before you write something. I am a Favre fan, but a Packer fan first!! Brett does not deserve to be handed the starting job back. Rodgers does not deserve to be handed it either, but has earned the right to compete for it. When asked if he would compete for it Brett just said "Why?" What the ****. You retired thats why. If I desided to retire from my job and the company hired my replacement and trained them, and I wanted to come out of retirement would I expect my old job back? NO! And don't tell me it is different, its not, they are both businesses. Even if I was better than the new guy, they could not fire them because I had more experiance. It would be unethical. That being said TT has not handled this well, but Favre has not been much of a help either. Favre should be able to beat our Rodgers if he would be willing to compete. If not, well then the best QB won and that is in the best interest of the team. Also how do you think the locker room would handle Favre coming back straight to starter. Some of the Vets would be fine, but the younger players might have a problem with it. Rodgers has been doing a lot of team building this offseason.

Way to go you were able to name 3 people out of 52 that were here before TT and I haven't seen him go out of his way to make sure those guys stay around for awhile. Driver got a baby extension and he practically had to hold out for it. I'm not saying Brett deserves the starting job just handed to him, I'm saying he needs to be brought back into actually compete for it and if TT doesn't want him to do that(which he doesn't) then release him so he can play somewhere else. I mean seriously if Teddy the Testicle doesn't think Favre is good enough to beat out AROD for the starting job then why won't he release him or try and trade him?? Oh that's right because he doesn't want to make HIMSELF look like a tool when Brett has another probowl year. This guy doesn't give to ****'s about the team it's all about building his portfolio. Also in the future why don't you try acting like an adult and instead of trying to insult me with "Don't be an idiot, think before you write something." You just state your case. Typing stuff like that makes me believe you have the IQ of a tic-tac

Packerbacker
07-19-2008, 05:08 PM
We could've had Moss, Wahle, Rivera and Marriuchi(spelling?) instead we have a ****ty o line and a fat guy whose head is so far up thompson ***
I don't think he has smelt anything besides **** since he got the job. Thompson is a thief and a liar and he must be canned

Yet while the fat guy was up Ted's *** we still were able to go the Championship game, where i believe FAVRE blew it. and another thing lets look at the Seahawks game didn't Grant pretty much dominate that game. It's a bunch of BS

Maybe you were watching a different game than me, I saw Favre play poorly at times and throw the last interception but I would not base the entire loss on Favre blowing anything. If harris would have played D we wouldn't of been in that situation. I mean if you going to say Favre blew that game then you also have to give credit to Favre for our first 8 wins before grant stepped in.

Ryan Diesel
07-19-2008, 05:17 PM
Hell even some of the games after he stepped in. Denver anyone? K.C.?

Ryan Diesel
07-19-2008, 05:17 PM
I'm confused by what u wrote.

But u might know the outcome, bcuz we didn't know what was said to Favre and the frequency of it to make him make such a quick decision. Whatever he does, there will be a backlash for it, and ppl already branded him as holding the team back, and it'll be worse. Like I said, he already explained it in the interview...

That's because he speaks like a caveman.

Ryan Diesel
07-19-2008, 05:20 PM
Maybe you were watching a different game than me, I saw Favre play poorly at times and throw the last interception but I would not base the entire loss on Favre blowing anything. If harris would have played D we wouldn't of been in that situation. I mean if you going to say Favre blew that game then you also have to give credit to Favre for our first 8 wins before grant stepped in.

Dude, I've become convinced that a lot of the people in this forum who say they are Packer fans don't watch the games. The see box scores and watch sportscenter. They must either live out of the viewing area and don't have NFL ticket, or they just work Sunday afternoons and only catch our nationally televised games.

crizgolfer
07-19-2008, 07:29 PM
In reality...Favre could have announced he wanted to play again. Then file for re-instatement...then show up for camp....all while saying very little. Everyone would have been better off. He didn't do that though. It all seems a bit dramatic now.

newdude
07-19-2008, 11:18 PM
In reality...Favre could have announced he wanted to play again. Then file for re-instatement...then show up for camp....all while saying very little. Everyone would have been better off. He didn't do that though. It all seems a bit dramatic now.

It's easier said then done.:)

Ryan Diesel
07-20-2008, 03:51 AM
In reality...Favre could have announced he wanted to play again. Then file for re-instatement...then show up for camp....all while saying very little. Everyone would have been better off. He didn't do that though. It all seems a bit dramatic now.

He was going to do that, but the secret got out. By that time the Packers said they didn't want him back. So the only way he can play this year is by going through all this dumb ****.

masseycubs
07-20-2008, 04:29 AM
This ***** is ridiculous. Favre is done unless he proves otherwise. The system the Packers run now is all about the recievers and the RBs. Anybody can run it. Favre is becoming an annoying attention whore.

It is a new era, the Rodgers era. With the "simplicity" (notice the quotes) of the offense, I'm more worried about the defense. I hate to piss on a hall of famer.but he is acting like a little kid.

Ryan Diesel
07-20-2008, 12:20 PM
Anyone can run it huh. Your as clueless as a cubs fan, oh nevermind. QB's that get hurt in practice can't run this offense though.

crizgolfer
07-20-2008, 03:30 PM
He was going to do that, but the secret got out. By that time the Packers said they didn't want him back. So the only way he can play this year is by going through all this dumb ****.

Maybe, but he still could have filed for re-instatement. Dropped the Greta interveiw and demand for release...and just show up for camp. The Packers would have had their hand forced one way or the other...and we would not have this childish game of "he said, she said."

A part of me thinks he has had this announsement planned for a while. I think back to the Letterman interview and how he toyed with Dave. Perhaps Brett felt everyone would be excited and open their arms to him. I have no proof of this, but it is a possiblity.

AFlagRules
07-20-2008, 10:42 PM
As long as he doesn't get what he wants, hes going to continue to do what hes doing. The only solution here is he comes to camp as the backup. Rodgers struggles and he gets re-inserted as #1 and we go to the Super bowl this time.

Someone said that anyone can run this offense. I can't disagree more with that. Although I hate what Favre has done. You have to respect what he can do on the field, how extremely well he knows the playbook, and the fact that hes the best QB playing. With Favre, we can win realistically 12 - 14 games. With Rodgers and his ups and downs a realistic shot is 7 - 10 wins.

servais77
07-20-2008, 10:59 PM
As long as he doesn't get what he wants, hes going to continue to do what hes doing. The only solution here is he comes to camp as the backup. Rodgers struggles and he gets re-inserted as #1 and we go to the Super bowl this time.

Someone said that anyone can run this offense. I can't disagree more with that. Although I hate what Favre has done. You have to respect what he can do on the field, how extremely well he knows the playbook, and the fact that hes the best QB playing. With Favre, we can win realistically 12 - 14 games. With Rodgers and his ups and downs a realistic shot is 7 - 10 wins.

So with Favre we can realistically win 12-14 games and with Rodgers it is 7-10....Just wanted to repeat that.

twelvePack
07-21-2008, 01:19 AM
As long as he doesn't get what he wants, hes going to continue to do what hes doing. The only solution here is he comes to camp as the backup. Rodgers struggles and he gets re-inserted as #1 and we go to the Super bowl this time.

Someone said that anyone can run this offense. I can't disagree more with that. Although I hate what Favre has done. You have to respect what he can do on the field, how extremely well he knows the playbook, and the fact that hes the best QB playing. With Favre, we can win realistically 12 - 14 games. With Rodgers and his ups and downs a realistic shot is 7 - 10 wins.

Go cheer for the Argonauts, because you don't make any sense. Bashing Favre, and preaching all this crap that the Packers "Owe" Rodgers. The Packers don't owe Rodgers a thing. Favre isn't a back-up, and you are a joke if you think he is one. Have you ever been to Lambeau??? The fans will burn the place down if Favre is sitting on the bench week one.

beast
07-21-2008, 01:43 AM
We could've had Moss, Wahle, Rivera and Marriuchi(spelling?) instead we have a ****ty o line and a fat guy whose head is so far up thompson ***

You do know, Wahle and Rivera, got worse fast after they left the Packers right? And MM reeled Favre in, and made him play in a system. And "Marriuchi" most likely would have left Favre stay the way he was under Sherman.

Moss is a good choice for your point.

beast
07-21-2008, 01:47 AM
the Packers "Owe" Rodgers.
I agree I don't think the Packers owe anybody. I think Favre's choices are

1) stay retired
2) Come back to the packers
3) work with the Packers for a trade, to a non-NFC North team.