Are the Packers being fair to Favre?

[r8rh8rmike]

There's no way they'll just release him to join another team. They might trade him to Tampa, of all places available. But otherwise; how fair is it to Rodgers, and to the rest of the team, that Favre should be able to come in, and start just because he says so? He's not Ted Thompson. And I think he thinks he is. He can't dictate what happens. At this point in time, he has to come back, he has to wait behind Rodgers, and if Rodgers cannot succeed, then he comes in, takes the reigns, and everyone else eats humble pie.

I agree that what Favre is doing isn't exactly fair to Rodgers or the rest of the team. After his "hard hitting" interview with Greta Van Susteren, it's looking less likely he'll be with the Packers, especially since he pretty much called Thompson an untrustworthy liar on national TV. If Favre does come back to Green Bay, they have to pay him $12 million, which is probably something they can not afford to do at this point. Trade seems like the most likely scenario, with Favre having de facto veto power on any transaction, so he does look to have the upper hand in this whole fiasco.

[Goldenfleece]

I agree that what Favre is doing isn't exactly fair to Rodgers or the rest of the team. After his "hard hitting" interview with Greta Van Susteren, it's looking less likely he'll be with the Packers, especially since he pretty much called Thompson an untrustworthy liar on national TV. If Favre does come back to Green Bay, they have to pay him $12 million, which is probably something they can not afford to do at this point. Trade seems like the most likely scenario, with Favre having de facto veto power on any transaction, so he does look to have the upper hand in this whole fiasco.

To some extent, Favre has the power here. On the other hand, the Packers could keep him on their roster right up until the end of the preseason and cut him at the last minute. Then he'd get his choice of teams, but that would put the other team in an awkward position of either handing him the starting job with no prep time or letting someone else start the first few games while Brett learns the playbook. Either way, he'd have no time to build chemistry with his receivers. So the team can exercise veto on destinations they don't like, at least long enough to make things difficult.

[r8rh8rmike]

To some extent, Favre has the power here. On the other hand, the Packers could keep him on their roster right up until the end of the preseason and cut him at the last minute. Then he'd get his choice of teams, but that would put the other team in an awkward position of either handing him the starting job with no prep time or letting someone else start the first few games while Brett learns the playbook. Either way, he'd have no time to build chemistry with his receivers. So the team can exercise veto on destinations they don't like, at least long enough to make things difficult.

Green Bay could definitely play hard ball if they want, but I've got to believe that would create havoc with the team and especially Rodgers, who already has got to be feeling the heat of the situation. As bad as things are getting now, I can only imagine the chaos and media circus atmosphere that would result if the Packers intentionally tried to draw this out for the entire preseason. In the end though, Favre would still get to go where he chooses.

What a complete mess.

[ramsanddodgers]

So if the Packers try to play hard ball but end up with a $12M bench player who is hurt more?

[Josh]

to brett it's not about the money, he wants to play, so I would say brett would be hurt more.

[Bar-bq]

to brett it's not about the money, he wants to play, so I would say brett would be hurt more.

But he wants to play his way. It's not just a desire to play; it's an issue of pride. Favre is so used to being the main man that anything less than complete control of "what happens to Brett" will ding his ego. He's well spoken, he's an icon, and he's a great player. But at the moment, he's plain selfish. Really, what more can he accomplish? That is, what are the legitimate chances of him going to any team that doesn't reside on the mythical cloud that is Cheeseland, Wisconsin, and winning the Superbowl This season? I personally don't think it's do-able. There just aren't any teams he could go to who are just a quarterback away from a title. Tampa might be the closest, but there still a way off it.

I think it's very much doomed from the outset. If he's going to come back and win, it's going to be in Green Bay. But due to the way he's handled the fiasco- his selfishness, per se, he's crippled his chances of returning to the franchise as the immediate starter. And if Green Bay are going to play hard-ball, he's going to have to take the hit, and he's going to have to wait.

[Goldenfleece]

There just aren't any teams he could go to who are just a quarterback away from a title. Tampa might be the closest, but there still a way off it.

What about the Vikings? Trading a first and two thirds for Jared Allen suggests they're in "win now" mode. With an already stout run defense bolstered by a top shelf pass rusher, they're in good shape on that side of the ball. On the offensive side, they've got Adrian Peterson to carry the rock and an offensive line anchored by Steve Hutchinson and Matt Birk. With an All Star quarterback, they really could be a contender. With Tarvaris Jackson at quarterback, they probably are not. Their offensive coordinator is apparently a former Packers assistant and close friend of Brett's, as well. Rumor has it the Vikings have been talking to Favre privately (and in violation of the rules) already.

This could be the exact situation Favre wants and the Packers definitely do not want.

[Bar-bq]

I agree, and I know you've probably acknowledged this:

But what team is stupid enough to trade their all star quarterback with probably one more good year left in him to a division rival?

[BIG-BLUE]

I agree, and I know you've probably acknowledged this:

But what team is stupid enough to trade their all star quarterback with probably one more good year left in him to a division rival?

The Packers

[rammiser]

I think this is just hilarious. I understand Brett not being ready and I understand that the Pack say they have moved on, but come on who are they kidding. Brett as a back-up to Rogers. now that's funny. If I were Brett I would call their bluff head back to Green Bay go through training camp as the back-up and get ready for the season. Then in the first game after Rogers has thrown 3 int's in the first half and the Pack is down 24-0 grab his helmet and be ready to start the second half. I mean come on are the packers really ready to throw the season down the toilet on Rogers? I doubt it, and he has only played in one reserve role and played well but that's not a starter role. Yeah Brett will be a back up (wink,wink). Please Brett call their bluff you wont be on the bench for long.

[Bar-bq]

Then in the first game after Rogers has thrown 3 int's in the first half and the Pack is down 24-0 grab his helmet and be ready to start the second half. I mean come on are the packers really ready to throw the season down the toilet on Rogers?

To be fair, the reserve role you mentioned was against the first team to go unbeaten in the regular season since 1972. And he played darn well. Favre, undoubtedly, is better than Rodgers. But for how long?

I mean, Brett Favre is no longer the Green Bay Packers. He hasn't been since Ahman Green. And when Green went downhill, so did the team. Favre couldn't rescue them. And what happened last season? The offense came together. Clifton, Jennings, Driver, Lee and Grant all had great years. The defense came together. Kampman made the pro bowl, and was defensive player of the month for October. Woodson won the weekly award. So did Barnett. Harris made the pro bowl.

What I'm saying is that the team is built to succeed without Favre. Sure, Favre would be great, but Rodgers is a former first round pick who has had three full seasons to learn behind him. If they don't move on this year, they will have to next year anyway. There's no guarantee Rodgers is a dud. He's looked good from what little we've seen from him, and he's learnt from probably the greatest player in the last fifteen years for the last three seasons. I'd say now would be as good a time as any for him to take the reigns, lest they waste the millions they invested.

[RamOfDenmark]

Strange, ugly situation there. I would selfishly hope that Green Bay takes back Favre as a starter, just because I'd personally like to see him play another year - I even think Green Bay has a legitimate chance at a championship with Favre this year, they were not far off last year.

If they're not going to let him be the starter then they have to release him and let him do whatever he wants in my opinion - he's earned it. Vikings look like the absolutely perfect place for him to go, he could really take them over the top. As much as the Packers would hate it, if they're not going to play him as a starter then they have to stand aside and let whatever happens happen. I don't feel that they should try to play hardball here, not with that particular player.

I have to say though, even though I've always liked Favre he has disappointed me a lot with all his shenanigans this offseason. Dude, make up your ****ing mind. Take a decision, then stick with it, none of this bull**** should have happened and it's Favre's fault that it did.

[RamWraith]

If I were the Packers front office, I would trade the guy to Indy (or New England) for a dollar. Give him a home were he doesn't stand a chance of starting and throw egg in his face for being such a baby about everything. Not sure what he is trying to gain about being so dramatic. Torks me off.

[rammiser]

To be fair, the reserve role you mentioned was against the first team to go unbeaten in the regular season since 1972. And he played darn well. Favre, undoubtedly, is better than Rodgers. But for how long?.

The Cowboys went undefeated? Favre is better than Rodgers isnt that all that matters? I mean they are paying Favre any way so why not let him play. Who cares how much longer Favre is better isnt this the win now NFL not lets give the young guy a chance and be the 20th best team. I'm sorry I think that Rodgers will suck and the Packers will free up a playoff spot without Favre so from a Rams perspective keep Favre away.

I mean, Brett Favre is no longer the Green Bay Packers. He hasn't been since Ahman Green. And when Green went downhill, so did the team. Favre couldn't rescue them.And what happened last season? The offense came together. Clifton, Jennings, Driver, Lee and Grant all had great years. The defense came together. Kampman made the pro bowl, and was defensive player of the month for October. Woodson won the weekly award. So did Barnett. Harris made the pro bowl. .

So Favre has to be the Packers? Should that go for every qb in the NFL or do qb's need help from team mates just not Favre. I've been arguing Bulger is a good qb just hasnt had the pieces. Funny you mentioned how good of years Driver,Lee and Jennigs had, did they throw the ball to themselves? If Bulger had the surrounding support Favre had wouldnt the Rams have made the playoffs too? Favre could never have done it himself and he hasnt he has needed support just like last year. Just because Rodgers is a former first round pick doesnt mean he has to be a starter. Ryan Leaf need I say more.

What I'm saying is that the team is built to succeed without Favre. Sure, Favre would be great, but Rodgers is a former first round pick who has had three full seasons to learn behind him. If they don't move on this year, they will have to next year anyway. There's no guarantee Rodgers is a dud. He's looked good from what little we've seen from him, and he's learnt from probably the greatest player in the last fifteen years for the last three seasons. I'd say now would be as good a time as any for him to take the reigns, lest they waste the millions they invested.

Are the Packers really built to succeed after Brett. You know for sure that Rodgers is going to be able to do enough to keep them a playoff team? I don't and I don't think the Packers are sure either. I remember reports talking about how bad the guy looked in practice and that the Packers were scared to rely on Rodgers because they didnt think he had what it took. Now after seeing him in limited action in one game vs the Cowboys they are sure? If that's the case the Rams need to bring back Ryan Fitzpatrick because he had one really good game too. All I'm saying is that if Favre still has some left in the tank and judging by last year he does then let the guy play. He's getting paid either way so why not bring him back.

[r8rh8rmike]

If I were the Packers front office, I would trade the guy to Indy (or New England) for a dollar. Give him a home were he doesn't stand a chance of starting and throw egg in his face for being such a baby about everything. Not sure what he is trying to gain about being so dramatic. Torks me off.

I think the Packers are torked too with all Favre's drama. They told Rodgers he's now the starter, told the team the same thing, started making decisions based on that and now their supposed to just scrap everything and say nevermind because Favre changed his mind for the umteenth time? Favre is really pushing the limit of the consideration he's earned IMO.

The problem with trying to trade Favre to some place he doesn't want to go is that all he has to do is not report and his rights revert back to Green Bay, then they're back to square one. Tough situation all around.