PDA

View Full Version : Thompson holding Favre hostage



JaYsAllThEWaY12
07-28-2008, 02:22 PM
Before anyone responds calling me a Thompson basher or an idiot for not realizing how much of a "diva" Favre is, let me clarify some things. I am a firm supporter of the way TT runs the Green Bay Packers, and I am totally in love with his build through the draft as well as from within philosophy. Furthermore, I feel it would be idiotic to say that Favre holds no blame in this situation. He has put the packers in a tough situation by wanting to come back, but no one here can say that the packers should tell Favre to shut up and go tend to his farm. If he wants to play it has to be honored, no one is saying it must be with the packers if they don't want him back.

Now, as the situation currently stands, I feel TT should stop his waffling. Everyone loves to place the all of the blame on Favre for his waffling on retirement and his acting like a "diva". The only way I could see Favre being a diva was if his stance was that he wanted to come back and play for the packers, and only for the packers. This is not his stance folks, Favre has already accepted he won't be suiting up for GB this year. The man just wants to lace em up and play, and the only cog in the engine here is TT's waffling.

Assuming that Thompson stays true to his philosophy about putting the best team on the field that he possibly can, we can conclude that he feels Rodgers gives the packers the best shot at the super bowl now. Obviously if he felt Favre gave the team a better shot to win, he would have accepted him back with open arms because he wants to put the best team on the field.

Thus, if Rodgers truly gives the packers a better shot to win now, then TT should have no qualms about trading Favre to anyone in the NFL regardless of if they are contenders or pretenders. How Favre fares on his new team should have no bearing on Thompson's mind because after all, Rodgers gives the team the best shot to win now. TT certainly had no trouble dealing away budding DT corey williams to make room for his hand picked replacement Justin Harrell. How is this current situation any different may I ask?

The bottom line is this: TT is scared of having his legacy tarred because he was the one who ran Favre out of town. He won't trade Favre to a legit contender who makes an offer for him because he knows Favre is a better QB now than Rodgers is. He is terrified that Rodgers may fail and make him look stupid, and/or that Favre may ascend a contender (vikings?) deep into the playoffs and possibly beat the packers in the playoffs, which would make TT look like a complete moron for letting Favre go in the first place.

But why is this to be feared? MM and TT have said over and over again that they have "moved on" and that A-Rod is the starting QB of the packers now. If we are really this confident that Rodgers can replace Favre and be a successful QB in the nfl this year, then the packers should trade Favre for the best compensation package offered, and live with any consequences that arise from the situation. I'm sorry TT, but you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You either want Favre as your QB this year or you don't. The man wants to play and you can't stop him from doing so. So trade him and be done with it. If by some chance he does go to a contender and beats you in the playoffs, than your nightmare has come true, and you only have yourself to blame for creating the monster that is #4 not ending his career wearing a green and gold jersey.

Roll the dice Thompson, cause no matter how you handle this situation, in the end all the reprecussions of your decision to not accept Favre back are going to fall squarely on your shoulders whether they be fantastic or utterly disparaging.

Ex-Redskins Fan
07-28-2008, 02:37 PM
...the only thing he fears is that Brett goes to Minnesota - that's the entire issue here and would spell doom for the Packers as the Vikes have every piece in place except QB and imagine a ramped-up Favre going against his former coach/GM/management.

Brooke
07-28-2008, 02:40 PM
The bottom line is this: TT is scared of having his legacy tarred because he was the one who ran Favre out of town. He won't trade Favre to a legit contender who makes an offer for him because he knows Favre is a better QB now than Rodgers is. He is terrified that Rodgers may fail and make him look stupid, and/or that Favre may ascend a contender (vikings?) deep into the playoffs and possibly beat the packers in the playoffs, which would make TT look like a complete moron for letting Favre go in the first place.

But why is this to be feared? MM and TT have said over and over again that they have "moved on" and that A-Rod is the starting QB of the packers now. If we are really this confident that Rodgers can replace Favre and be a successful QB in the nfl this year, then the packers should trade Favre for the best compensation package offered, and live with any consequences that arise from the situation. I'm sorry TT, but you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You either want Favre as your QB this year or you don't. The man wants to play and you can't stop him from doing so. So trade him and be done with it. If by some chance he does go to a contender and beats you in the playoffs, than your nightmare has come true, and you only have yourself to blame for creating the monster that is #4 not ending his career wearing a green and gold jersey.

Roll the dice Thompson, cause no matter how you handle this situation, in the end all the reprecussions of your decision to not accept Favre back are going to fall squarely on your shoulders whether they be fantastic or utterly disparaging.

Bingo!! They are scared to death. He is scared his decision will come back to bite him in the butt. He and everyone knows Brett is the better QB but his ego and stubborness is in the way and trying to drive Brett out of town

He called the Jets, we all know they arent a playoff team yet and especially with the Pats in the division. He wants Brett far away because he knows if he went to a team like the Vikings he has the chance to beat them badly and win a ring w/out HIM!! and they can't have it

he knows if his decision bombs badly everyone will blame him and it will be too late to fix it

BrewCityBuck
07-29-2008, 12:55 PM
Assuming that Thompson stays true to his philosophy about putting the best team on the field that he possibly can, we can conclude that he feels Rodgers gives the packers the best shot at the super bowl now. .

Please tell me your not this stupid? When Ted Thompson says he wants to and will put his best effort on the field, their are circumstances involved. You can't tell me you can't see past the managerial smoke talk. Every manager says the same thing, in every sport, that he will put the best team on the field as possible, he has to say it.

But at some point you have to sacrifice winning, especially at the QB position for down the road success.

JaYsAllThEWaY12
07-29-2008, 01:28 PM
Please tell me your not this stupid? When Ted Thompson says he wants to and will put his best effort on the field, their are circumstances involved. You can't tell me you can't see past the managerial smoke talk. Every manager says the same thing, in every sport, that he will put the best team on the field as possible, he has to say it.

But at some point you have to sacrifice winning, especially at the QB position for down the road success.



Apparently I didn't make my point in that paragraph clear enough. I was taking jabs at TT for saying that he always is trying to put the best team on the field. Cause if that was really the case, Brett Favre would be back on the field. Furthermore, from all of the praising TT and MM have done about Rodgers, there's no reason for the fans to believe we have to "sacrifice winning" for "down the road success". After all A-Rod is a great QB according to TT and MM, and he is going to pick up right where Favre left off (HERES A HELPFUL HINT FOR YOU INCASE YOU DIDN'T PICK IT UP THIS TIME: THAT WAS SARCASM!).

And don't misconstrue my words here either. I am by no means an A-Rod basher, and I am totally behind him as our starting QB. The only concept I was addressing in my previous argument was that TT really doesn't have a "win now" attitude despite what he claims, and that he is letting his ego get in the way of this team competing for a SB RIGHT NOW. Rodgers sat on the bench the last 3 years, and there's really no reason for him not to continue to sit there while Favre plays at a higher level. But I digress, cause the point of my argument was not that Favre should start in GB, but that TT should follow through on his decision to have A-Rod as his starting QB and trade Favre for the best compensation available, even if it is to the vikings, and that he should live with the reprecussions of his actions. If we're truly heading in another direction away from Favre, then we may as well help the future (and Favre) by trading him away so that GB is happy, and so is he since he can START again.

Lastly, I can't believe you'd say something as stupid as 'sacrificing winning for down the road success'. The only time the conecpt of "sacrificing winning" should be applied is when the team is in rebuilding mode. And even then it's not really applicable. Tell me exactly when the last time you saw a team who was 'planning to win later on' decided that the upcoming season would be a good time to "sacrifice" some wins that season so that they could make those wins back up a couple years down the road?

Ryan Diesel
07-29-2008, 01:32 PM
I thought we sacrificed 05 and 06 for "down the road success" Well we're down the road, we shouldn't be sacrificing anymore.

JaYsAllThEWaY12
07-29-2008, 01:33 PM
Damn good point Ryan Diesel. Damn good point.

Ryan Diesel
07-29-2008, 01:45 PM
It's just like, we're not some minor league team that we have to go and develop three QB's from scratch when the rest of the team is Super Bowl ready. It's dumb in the first place to start a season with 3 QB's who have never started an NFL game. I can't remember one other instance where a team has ever done that, and I can't think of many reasons why anyone would. Sure Favre is putting the team in a tough position, but it's one that makes the team better, so you won't hear me complaining. It's just like a few years back, when Favre took forever to make his decision. A lot of the reason Favre takes so long to decide if he's coming back is he wants to see what moves the team makes in the offseason. Everyone cried because he took so long to decide before 06, saying he was holding the team hostage. Well your damn right he was, and he forced Thompson to sign Ryan Pickett and Charles Woodson. The day they signed Woodson Favre came back. Favre had to practically put a gun to TT's head to get him to sign a couple players. Just think where we'd be today without Pickett and Woodson.

newdude
07-29-2008, 01:46 PM
I thought we sacrificed 05 and 06 for "down the road success" Well we're down the road, we shouldn't be sacrificing anymore.

I guess we're still in rebuilding mode after being a contender, wooohoo:confused:

socalpkrbkr
07-29-2008, 01:53 PM
Just think where we'd be today without Pickett and Woodson.

No thanks and you can't make me either!:silly:

BrewCityBuck
07-29-2008, 03:05 PM
Well your damn right he was, and he forced Thompson to sign Ryan Pickett and Charles Woodson. The day they signed Woodson Favre came back. Favre had to practically put a gun to TT's head to get him to sign a couple players. Just think where we'd be today without Pickett and Woodson.

Oh please. Now your giving Brett Favre credit for coincidently the two best FA signings Ted Thompson has made...Just because Brett Favre wanted Ted Thompson to make some FA signings doesn't mean Thompson made those signings because of Brett Favre's insistance. To make that assurtion is utterly ridiculous.

Someone as focused and diciplined as Ted Thompson wouldn't go out on a whim and spend $80 million dollars just to appease Brett Favre. I could maybe understand that point with some of the other GM's in football, but certainly not Ted Thompson.

Ryan Diesel
07-29-2008, 03:38 PM
Are you not a Packer fan?? Do you not remember Favre publicly stating that year that he wanted the Packers to sign some FA's. They dragged their feet all offseason, and they wanted an answer from Favre before the draft. He held his ground and said he wanted to see some FA signings first. We signed Pickett, and Favre still wasn't sold. Within hours after the Charles Woodson signing Favre announced his return. Favre forced Thompsons hand, and it worked out pretty damn good for us. Thompson didn't want to sign Woodson in the first place, for the same reasons every other team didn't want to. He was getting up in years, wanted big money, and had an injury past along with having beef with the Raiders old coach Bill Callahan. Thompson knew after a 4-12 season, if Favre retired and we finished with another losing record he would be fired. So he needed Favre back at that time, so he gave in and finally signed someone. Who has he signed since?? Frank Walker, Brandon Chillar, and Joey Toledo. Thats all we've signed since 06.

BrewCityBuck
07-29-2008, 04:08 PM
Are you not a Packer fan?? Do you not remember Favre publicly stating that year that he wanted the Packers to sign some FA's. They dragged their feet all offseason, and they wanted an answer from Favre before the draft. He held his ground and said he wanted to see some FA signings first. We signed Pickett, and Favre still wasn't sold. Within hours after the Charles Woodson signing Favre announced his return. Favre forced Thompsons hand, and it worked out pretty damn good for us. Thompson didn't want to sign Woodson in the first place, for the same reasons every other team didn't want to. He was getting up in years, wanted big money, and had an injury past along with having beef with the Raiders old coach Bill Callahan. Thompson knew after a 4-12 season, if Favre retired and we finished with another losing record he would be fired. So he needed Favre back at that time, so he gave in and finally signed someone. Who has he signed since?? Frank Walker, Brandon Chillar, and Joey Toledo. Thats all we've signed since 06.

Do you have any evidence of this? It just sounds like a theory of yours that your taking as historical fact. And just pointing it out, I drown Favre out every offseason (since the retirement talks) because as the years went on, summer after summer I just got tired of listening to it. So i'm sorry if I can't recall exact dates and times of when Favre said this that or the other thing.

Who has he signed since? He hasn't really needed to make a big signing, at the time we have a big hole at CB and needed a DT. The roster was pretty much set, Thompson hasn't had to go out and make big money moves, and like i've said, it's not like FA's are banging the door down to come here.

We've also signed Vern Morency among other small additions.

favreisright
07-29-2008, 04:39 PM
TT is an idiot, done deal

Ryan Diesel
07-29-2008, 05:10 PM
Do you have any evidence of this? It just sounds like a theory of yours that your taking as historical fact. And just pointing it out, I drown Favre out every offseason (since the retirement talks) because as the years went on, summer after summer I just got tired of listening to it. So i'm sorry if I can't recall exact dates and times of when Favre said this that or the other thing.

Who has he signed since? He hasn't really needed to make a big signing, at the time we have a big hole at CB and needed a DT. The roster was pretty much set, Thompson hasn't had to go out and make big money moves, and like i've said, it's not like FA's are banging the door down to come here.

We've also signed Vern Morency among other small additions.

Pretty much set?? We were coming off a 4-12 season. We were anything but set. And like I said, we still have some of the same holes now. Yeah, it's not theory, just because you drown out the offseason every year doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You have that TT mentality where you think you can just close your eyes and it'll all go away. It was all over SportsCenter, this forum, the bottom line of the screen for weeks, talked about on NFL live every day. Favre was delaying his decision to return in 06 because he wanted the Packers to sign someone after a 4-12 season. Morency was also aquired by a trade, we gave Samkon Gado for him. What does Morency have to do with anything anyway? lol what has he done besides ride the stationary bike since he's gotten here? I mean I smoke a lot of buds, but you have worse short term memory than me. How soon Packer fans forget, I tell you I don't hear any Packer fans in real life talk the way you so called Packer fans sweat Teddy's white haired balls.

JJohnson0522
07-29-2008, 05:38 PM
...the only thing he fears is that Brett goes to Minnesota - that's the entire issue here and would spell doom for the Packers as the Vikes have every piece in place except QB and imagine a ramped-up Favre going against his former coach/GM/management.



Amen.



And why does Brett want to come here in anyways??



Never thought i would see the day where #4 wants to put on purple and gold....:D

wwfd1220
07-29-2008, 05:56 PM
havent heard him say that yet. all speculation right now. brett wants to be a packer. it is the management that is preventing that.

junior_trane
07-29-2008, 10:35 PM
It would be irresponsible for the Packers to let Favre go to Minnesota, much less any team within the NFC North. This SHOULD be common sense, but for some strange reason it is not. From a business stand point, Thompson has already stated it would not be prudent to just release a player of value without getting something in return. From a personal standpoint, too many people stand to lose if Favre goes to the an NFC North team. I feel so strongly that this organization knows it must avoid dividing the fan base by having one of its biggest iconic figures playing against the Packers in a Purple or dark/light Blue jersey twice a season (much less having to see Lambeau peppered with purple Favre jerseys.) Many fans would be torn. This ties into to idea of not being a sound business decision. And the GM is not the only person the stands to lose in that scenario, despite what so many people here obviously think.

In the end, this whole thing will be a footnote in the history of the team and the player, so I hope it gets resolved very soon.

I will back the Pack win or lose for every season the rest of my life. Regardless of who is on the team. We all have opinions on what should and should not happen with our beloved team, but most times we have to understand that we are not informed enough to make valid arguments. I wish some (most) of you here would do the same.....

JaYsAllThEWaY12
07-30-2008, 09:37 AM
It would be irresponsible for the Packers to let Favre go to Minnesota, much less any team within the NFC North. This SHOULD be common sense, but for some strange reason it is not. From a business stand point, Thompson has already stated it would not be prudent to just release a player of value without getting something in return. From a personal standpoint, too many people stand to lose if Favre goes to the an NFC North team. I feel so strongly that this organization knows it must avoid dividing the fan base by having one of its biggest iconic figures playing against the Packers in a Purple or dark/light Blue jersey twice a season (much less having to see Lambeau peppered with purple Favre jerseys.) Many fans would be torn. This ties into to idea of not being a sound business decision. And the GM is not the only person the stands to lose in that scenario, despite what so many people here obviously think.

In the end, this whole thing will be a footnote in the history of the team and the player, so I hope it gets resolved very soon.

I will back the Pack win or lose for every season the rest of my life. Regardless of who is on the team. We all have opinions on what should and should not happen with our beloved team, but most times we have to understand that we are not informed enough to make valid arguments. I wish some (most) of you here would do the same.....


I'm pretty sure most of us understand that we are nothing more than fans of the team. I'm pretty sure most of us would support GB with or without Favre. There's a reason TT is the GM of the packers and we're not, we understand this. That doesn't mean we can't moan and groan about his decisions and air our opinions about the direction of the club and how we feel about their decisions in general. There's no wrong in the fans caring enough about the organization that they scutinize the organizations every move.