http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...ml?eref=writers
He now admits part of the reason he came back was to stick it to Ted. Kind of petty if you ask me and the wrong reason to play.
Full Version: Favre SI article
QUOTE (GBP4EVER @ Feb 16 2009, 09:09 PM) 
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...ml?eref=writers
He now admits part of the reason he came back was to stick it to Ted. Kind of petty if you ask me and the wrong reason to play.
He now admits part of the reason he came back was to stick it to Ted. Kind of petty if you ask me and the wrong reason to play.
Like this is a big shock.
This has been discussed in numerous threads already. Did he say anything new that nobody has reported yet?
He felt betrayed by the team and wanted to prove he could still play -- big friggin' deal people.
I can guarantee every single person on this board at least once in their life has felt that very same urge. Be careful getting down from those high horses you all reside on.
I can guarantee every single person on this board at least once in their life has felt that very same urge. Be careful getting down from those high horses you all reside on.
QUOTE (Heatseeker @ Feb 16 2009, 06:56 PM)
He felt betrayed by the team and wanted to prove he could still play
And knew he could earn $12 million doing it! Have to say, I'd be tempted.
As already posted, nothing new there. Although his original reason for coming back was that he thought he could still play. His motivations changed once the Packers didn't embrace that.
I find the comment that Brett heard "crickets" from the Packers after the 2007 season was over disingenuous though. I wish King would be a journalist here and rebut that comment that MM stated he was often in contact with him after the season was over or get Brett's comments on that assertion or at least some clarification. Instead, it's just thrown out there, taken at face value and not clarified. Bias at its finest.
I find the comment that Brett heard "crickets" from the Packers after the 2007 season was over disingenuous though. I wish King would be a journalist here and rebut that comment that MM stated he was often in contact with him after the season was over or get Brett's comments on that assertion or at least some clarification. Instead, it's just thrown out there, taken at face value and not clarified. Bias at its finest.
QUOTE (La Ment @ Feb 16 2009, 11:19 AM)
As already posted, nothing new there. Although his original reason for coming back was that he thought he could still play. His motivations changed once the Packers didn't embrace that.
I find the comment that Brett heard "crickets" from the Packers after the 2007 season was over disingenuous though. I wish King would be a journalist here and rebut that comment that MM stated he was often in contact with him after the season was over or get Brett's comments on that assertion or at least some clarification. Instead, it's just thrown out there, taken at face value and not clarified. Bias at its finest.
I find the comment that Brett heard "crickets" from the Packers after the 2007 season was over disingenuous though. I wish King would be a journalist here and rebut that comment that MM stated he was often in contact with him after the season was over or get Brett's comments on that assertion or at least some clarification. Instead, it's just thrown out there, taken at face value and not clarified. Bias at its finest.
I think he is just reporting what Brett says but IF McCarthy or Thompson ever came out and said differently TO Peter King ( dont know if they have or not) then he would print it also.
QUOTE (La Ment @ Feb 17 2009, 12:19 AM)
As already posted, nothing new there. Although his original reason for coming back was that he thought he could still play. His motivations changed once the Packers didn't embrace that.
I find the comment that Brett heard "crickets" from the Packers after the 2007 season was over disingenuous though. I wish King would be a journalist here and rebut that comment that MM stated he was often in contact with him after the season was over or get Brett's comments on that assertion or at least some clarification. Instead, it's just thrown out there, taken at face value and not clarified. Bias at its finest.
I find the comment that Brett heard "crickets" from the Packers after the 2007 season was over disingenuous though. I wish King would be a journalist here and rebut that comment that MM stated he was often in contact with him after the season was over or get Brett's comments on that assertion or at least some clarification. Instead, it's just thrown out there, taken at face value and not clarified. Bias at its finest.
It has been reported that McCarthy was asking Favre "if he was coming back" not we "want you back". Splitting hairs maybe. But never once have I read that the Packer organization went to Favre and said we want you back. They pressed him for an answer if he wanted to come back, thats it. Big difference IMO
QUOTE (packinatl @ Feb 16 2009, 11:24 AM)
It has been reported that McCarthy was asking Favre "if he was coming back" not we "want you back". Splitting hairs maybe. But never once have I read that the Packer organization went to Favre and said we want you back. They pressed him for an answer if he wanted to come back, thats it
Again tough its one of those things that like you said is splitting hairs. Nobody really knows what the conversations were. Change one word in a sentence from either side and all of a sudden you have people saying that Favre was attacking TT and the Packers which I still find very hard to believe and that MM and TT didnt want Brett back which I find hard to believe.
QUOTE (packinatl @ Feb 16 2009, 12:24 PM)
It has been reported that McCarthy was asking Favre "if he was coming back" not we "want you back". Splitting hairs maybe. But never once have I read that the Packer organization went to Favre and said we want you back. They pressed him for an answer if he wanted to come back, thats it. Big difference IMO
Your post intrigued me, so I went to Packers.com and pulled the following snippet from the March 4, 2008 press conference with TT and MM, prior to Brett's official retirement announcement, where TT stated both MM and TT wanted Brett back. TT could be flat out lying. It could just be a case of he said/he said. But at the very least, present what TT and MM said about Brett and wanting him back and get his response.
(Ted, are you surprised he's hanging it up based on his performance last year?)
Thompson: A little bit. But I think it doesn't matter when it comes, whether it would have come two years ago or four years from now, I think the finality of it, all of a sudden it kind of hits you, Brett Favre's not going to be our quarterback anymore. So it's surprising in that regard. Speaking with Brett and obviously I've had conversations and Mike has, there's certain things we wouldn't talk about because I don't think it's appropriate, it was a conversation between two people. But this decision was a complicated decision. It's not as simple as even I might think it is. Do you want to play or don't want to play? It's more complicated than that. Brett's a professional football player, one of the finest if not the finest that I've ever seen. He wants to know a couple of things. Do you still want me, and can I still play? Obviously both Mike and I were very positive in that regard and said definitely we do. After having said that, then there are other factors that weigh into his decision-making process, and like I say, it's a very complicated thing, especially (for) one that has the experience and has played for such a long time at such a high level and has those expectations all the time. It's not as easy as one might think.
(His agent and brother have hinted he wasn't wanted enough. Did you feel you did enough to communicate you wanted him back?)
Thompson: I certainly do. Mike and I, our approach was the same as it was last year at this time. The year before, when Mike was the new coach here, we took a little different approach because we kind of needed to introduce ourselves a little bit more. But last year was the same. Mike kind of stayed in constant contact, and I would make sure I stayed in touch from time to time, but we felt like, in each of those years it was important for Brett to make this decision for Brett, not to be badgered. He doesn't want to be talked into doing something one way or the other. He wants to know, like I say, can I still play and do you want me? Yes and yes. After that he has to make the decision beyond that. But we felt like the communication lines were open, and we felt like we gave him enough space to be able to make the right decision for him.
QUOTE (La Ment @ Feb 17 2009, 12:51 AM)
Your post intrigued me, so I went to Packers.com and pulled the following snippet from the March 4, 2008 press conference with TT and MM, prior to Brett's official retirement announcement, where TT stated both MM and TT wanted Brett back. TT could be flat out lying. It could just be a case of he said/he said. But at the very least, present what TT and MM said about Brett and wanting him back and get his response.
(Ted, are you surprised he's hanging it up based on his performance last year?)
Thompson: A little bit. But I think it doesn't matter when it comes, whether it would have come two years ago or four years from now, I think the finality of it, all of a sudden it kind of hits you, Brett Favre's not going to be our quarterback anymore. So it's surprising in that regard. Speaking with Brett and obviously I've had conversations and Mike has, there's certain things we wouldn't talk about because I don't think it's appropriate, it was a conversation between two people. But this decision was a complicated decision. It's not as simple as even I might think it is. Do you want to play or don't want to play? It's more complicated than that. Brett's a professional football player, one of the finest if not the finest that I've ever seen. He wants to know a couple of things. Do you still want me, and can I still play? Obviously both Mike and I were very positive in that regard and said definitely we do. After having said that, then there are other factors that weigh into his decision-making process, and like I say, it's a very complicated thing, especially (for) one that has the experience and has played for such a long time at such a high level and has those expectations all the time. It's not as easy as one might think.
(His agent and brother have hinted he wasn't wanted enough. Did you feel you did enough to communicate you wanted him back?)
Thompson: I certainly do. Mike and I, our approach was the same as it was last year at this time. The year before, when Mike was the new coach here, we took a little different approach because we kind of needed to introduce ourselves a little bit more. But last year was the same. Mike kind of stayed in constant contact, and I would make sure I stayed in touch from time to time, but we felt like, in each of those years it was important for Brett to make this decision for Brett, not to be badgered. He doesn't want to be talked into doing something one way or the other. He wants to know, like I say, can I still play and do you want me? Yes and yes. After that he has to make the decision beyond that. But we felt like the communication lines were open, and we felt like we gave him enough space to be able to make the right decision for him.
(Ted, are you surprised he's hanging it up based on his performance last year?)
Thompson: A little bit. But I think it doesn't matter when it comes, whether it would have come two years ago or four years from now, I think the finality of it, all of a sudden it kind of hits you, Brett Favre's not going to be our quarterback anymore. So it's surprising in that regard. Speaking with Brett and obviously I've had conversations and Mike has, there's certain things we wouldn't talk about because I don't think it's appropriate, it was a conversation between two people. But this decision was a complicated decision. It's not as simple as even I might think it is. Do you want to play or don't want to play? It's more complicated than that. Brett's a professional football player, one of the finest if not the finest that I've ever seen. He wants to know a couple of things. Do you still want me, and can I still play? Obviously both Mike and I were very positive in that regard and said definitely we do. After having said that, then there are other factors that weigh into his decision-making process, and like I say, it's a very complicated thing, especially (for) one that has the experience and has played for such a long time at such a high level and has those expectations all the time. It's not as easy as one might think.
(His agent and brother have hinted he wasn't wanted enough. Did you feel you did enough to communicate you wanted him back?)
Thompson: I certainly do. Mike and I, our approach was the same as it was last year at this time. The year before, when Mike was the new coach here, we took a little different approach because we kind of needed to introduce ourselves a little bit more. But last year was the same. Mike kind of stayed in constant contact, and I would make sure I stayed in touch from time to time, but we felt like, in each of those years it was important for Brett to make this decision for Brett, not to be badgered. He doesn't want to be talked into doing something one way or the other. He wants to know, like I say, can I still play and do you want me? Yes and yes. After that he has to make the decision beyond that. But we felt like the communication lines were open, and we felt like we gave him enough space to be able to make the right decision for him.
Thanks for pulling that. My gut is that Favre was not upset at that point but when he indicated that he wanted to come back and the organization said no he felt slighted. Not one of us will ever know what was going thru Favres mind at the time he had the presser. Did he announce too soon? my guess is yes. When he had time to think it thru the more and more he wanted to come back and play and when he did he was told to stay away. He wanted open competition and he was told no. That is the point he wanted to "stick it to Ted"
My take on this is that you don't admit to trying to get revenge if you still have the urge.
My guess is he's past that stage now and is staying retired, or at the very least
not trying to play for the Vikings anymore.
My guess is he's past that stage now and is staying retired, or at the very least
not trying to play for the Vikings anymore.
At the end of the day Brett Favre is not the first professional athlete to want to "stick it" to their old team and he will not be the last. Talk about a non story
QUOTE (Heatseeker @ Feb 16 2009, 10:56 AM)
He felt betrayed by the team and wanted to prove he could still play -- big friggin' deal people.
I can guarantee every single person on this board at least once in their life has felt that very same urge. Be careful getting down from those high horses you all reside on.
I can guarantee every single person on this board at least once in their life has felt that very same urge. Be careful getting down from those high horses you all reside on.
I agree and I hope that everyone on this board is equally careful to not condemn Thompson. I am sure that from their own perspectives, each of them considered what they were doing justified. Sometimes that's just how things work out - it's no one's fault. IMO, the "Brat" Favre comments & the "TT ran Favre out of town" comments are untrue and disrespectful.
QUOTE (Cocoman @ Feb 17 2009, 12:52 AM)
I agree and I hope that everyone on this board is equally careful to not condemn Thompson. I am sure that from their own perspectives, each of them considered what they were doing justified. Sometimes that's just how things work out - it's no one's fault. IMO, the "Brat" Favre comments & the "TT ran Favre out of town" comments are untrue and disrespectful.
Amen to that!!
Also I see nothing wrong with Favre trying to stick to the Packers. That is human nature. I would guess TT wanted Brett to suck also...
QUOTE (WB PackerFan @ Feb 16 2009, 03:57 PM)
Amen to that!!
Also I see nothing wrong with Favre trying to stick to the Packers. That is human nature. I would guess TT wanted Brett to suck also...
Also I see nothing wrong with Favre trying to stick to the Packers. That is human nature. I would guess TT wanted Brett to suck also...
I dont think so. TT wanted Favre to play well because the better Favre played the better the Jets did and that would lead to a better draft pick. Also I can see Favre wanting to stick it to the pack if they had come out and just cut him and said we think Rodgers is the better QB. But Favre played just as big if not the biggest part in this mess so I can not see any good reason for him wanting to stick it to the pack.
Even though I wonder what motivates Brett to say such a thing, especially after the fact, is it possible that TT needs to be told to stick it?
QUOTE (GBP4EVER @ Feb 16 2009, 05:38 PM)
I dont think so. TT wanted Favre to play well because the better Favre played the better the Jets did and that would lead to a better draft pick. Also I can see Favre wanting to stick it to the pack if they had come out and just cut him and said we think Rodgers is the better QB. But Favre played just as big if not the biggest part in this mess so I can not see any good reason for him wanting to stick it to the pack.
Who really cares though? We can all speculate on who was a bigger d-bag then who but in the end its still almost been a year since his retirement, we got a decent draft pick for him while only giving up a 7th rounder, and we have a good QB running the team now.
Everybody got what they wanted.
TT finally got rid of Favre
Favre got another year to play
The rest is a moot point.
QUOTE (GBP4EVER @ Feb 16 2009, 07:09 AM)
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...ml?eref=writers
He now admits part of the reason he came back was to stick it to Ted. Kind of petty if you ask me and the wrong reason to play.
He now admits part of the reason he came back was to stick it to Ted. Kind of petty if you ask me and the wrong reason to play.
Couldnt care less about the reasons he can back. He isnt throwing picks in big games for the Packer any longer. One thing is for sure, he sure stuck it to Ted by leading the NFL in interceptions and proving what any logical fan knew long ago.
QUOTE (Vinnie @ Feb 16 2009, 06:50 PM)
Even though I wonder what motivates Brett to say such a thing, especially after the fact, is it possible that TT needs to be told to stick it?
Does TT really care if Favre tells him that? Favre was hoping to play well to stick it to Ted. It did not work out. Even if TT is gloating about it behind closed doors he will never admit it to anyone who will talk because he does not want to look like a jerk or start the pissing match up again between him and Favre.
QUOTE (LuvdaPack36 @ Feb 16 2009, 05:51 PM)
Who really cares though? We can all speculate on who was a bigger d-bag then who but in the end its still almost been a year since his retirement, we got a decent draft pick for him while only giving up a 7th rounder, and we have a good QB running the team now.
Everybody got what they wanted.
TT finally got rid of Favre
Everybody got what they wanted.
TT finally got rid of Favre
Whoah, talk about speculating. Care to back that up with some actually evidence instead of spouting off?
QUOTE (GBP4EVER @ Feb 17 2009, 05:38 AM)
I dont think so. TT wanted Favre to play well because the better Favre played the better the Jets did and that would lead to a better draft pick. Also I can see Favre wanting to stick it to the pack if they had come out and just cut him and said we think Rodgers is the better QB. But Favre played just as big if not the biggest part in this mess so I can not see any good reason for him wanting to stick it to the pack.
you cannot be serious
QUOTE (PackerBronco @ Feb 16 2009, 06:29 PM)
Whoah, talk about speculating. Care to back that up with some actually evidence instead of spouting off?
I really didnt think I was "spouting off". Why would you think that?
Im pretty sure when TT used his first draft pick he ever had on a QB he had every intention of playing him when Favre finally left. Aaron was, for lack of a better term, TTs pet project.
IMO thats why TT was waiting for Favre to leave so he could really put his stamp on the Packers.
What I said was not intended as a bash on TT. Im really sorry you took it that way.
QUOTE (The GM @ Feb 17 2009, 06:08 AM)
Couldnt care less about the reasons he can back. He isnt throwing picks in big games for the Packer any longer. One thing is for sure, he sure stuck it to Ted by leading the NFL in interceptions and proving what any logical fan knew long ago.
lets just hope we play in another BIG GAME soon. Must have made it much easier for you this January no stressful picks
QUOTE (GBP4EVER @ Feb 16 2009, 06:13 PM)
Does TT really care if Favre tells him that? Favre was hoping to play well to stick it to Ted. It did not work out. Even if TT is gloating about it behind closed doors he will never admit it to anyone who will talk because he does not want to look like a jerk or start the pissing match up again between him and Favre.
I can't speculate what TT thinks but if he has a big ego, as I suspect most do that are involved in the NFL, I would think he does care.
Just may be, BF did it to save some face with his friends and teammates? Maybe others fel the same but can't say anything about it? I do not know, but I think something happened.
QUOTE (LuvdaPack36 @ Feb 16 2009, 04:43 PM)
I really didnt think I was "spouting off". Why would you think that?
Im pretty sure when TT used his first draft pick he ever had on a QB he had every intention of playing him when Favre finally left. Aaron was, for lack of a better term, TTs pet project.
IMO thats why TT was waiting for Favre to leave so he could really put his stamp on the Packers.
What I said was not intended as a bash on TT. Im really sorry you took it that way.
Im pretty sure when TT used his first draft pick he ever had on a QB he had every intention of playing him when Favre finally left. Aaron was, for lack of a better term, TTs pet project.
IMO thats why TT was waiting for Favre to leave so he could really put his stamp on the Packers.
What I said was not intended as a bash on TT. Im really sorry you took it that way.
QUOTE
TT finally got rid of Favre
Your statement is not a bash? C'mon!!
Some of you guys need to get your facts straight or heads out of the sand.
When Brett started his yearly waffling on whether he was going to play or not an opportunity came along to draft a potential replacement at QB and Thompson made Rodgers the selection. It was inevitable that some day Brett was 'really' going to retire and the Packers were preparing for that event as any smart team would do. Now look at the Jets position. Their QB should still be Pennington but Brett threw a wrench in there to and now they have to go out and find someone to lead the team at the most important position!
So Thompson is the bad guy for trading Brett? I don't think so and most people are finally waking up to that. Eh I'm not happy with everything he has done but the decision had to be made and it was.
The Packers moved on and rightfully so after Brett's teary farewell retirement news conference. We all believed him including the Packers and the time had come to move on as hard as it was to believe.
We all are aware of what Brett meant for the Packers, City, State and the fans as a player. Hopefully at some point this last year will be overshadowed by his total time spent in Green Bay as a member of the team.
It's amazing when news comes out now about Brett it's called 'Favre bashing' because things are coming out that some cannot believe Brett would do or say. The problem with that is that the latest comes from Favre and not the Packers.
Thompson? He's just happened to be the guy who was in the GM position to make the decision in the best interest of the future of the Green Bay Packers.
QUOTE (LMG @ Feb 16 2009, 07:34 PM)
Your statement is not a bash? C'mon!!
Some of you guys need to get your facts straight or heads out of the sand.
When Brett started his yearly waffling on whether he was going to play or not an opportunity came along to draft a potential replacement at QB and Thompson made Rodgers the selection. It was inevitable that some day Brett was 'really' going to retire and the Packers were preparing for that event as any smart team would do. Now look at the Jets position. Their QB should still be Pennington but Brett threw a wrench in there to and now they have to go out and find someone to lead the team at the most important position!
So Thompson is the bad guy for trading Brett? I don't think so and most people are finally waking up to that. Eh I'm not happy with everything he has done but the decision had to be made and it was.
The Packers moved on and rightfully so after Brett's teary farewell retirement news conference. We all believed him including the Packers and the time had come to move on as hard as it was to believe.
We all are aware of what Brett meant for the Packers, City, State and the fans as a player. Hopefully at some point this last year will be overshadowed by his total time spent in Green Bay as a member of the team.
It's amazing when news comes out now about Brett it's called 'Favre bashing' because things are coming out that some cannot believe Brett would do or say. The problem with that is that the latest comes from Favre and not the Packers.
Thompson? He's just happened to be the guy who was in the GM position to make the decision in the best interest of the future of the Green Bay Packers.
Some of you guys need to get your facts straight or heads out of the sand.
When Brett started his yearly waffling on whether he was going to play or not an opportunity came along to draft a potential replacement at QB and Thompson made Rodgers the selection. It was inevitable that some day Brett was 'really' going to retire and the Packers were preparing for that event as any smart team would do. Now look at the Jets position. Their QB should still be Pennington but Brett threw a wrench in there to and now they have to go out and find someone to lead the team at the most important position!
So Thompson is the bad guy for trading Brett? I don't think so and most people are finally waking up to that. Eh I'm not happy with everything he has done but the decision had to be made and it was.
The Packers moved on and rightfully so after Brett's teary farewell retirement news conference. We all believed him including the Packers and the time had come to move on as hard as it was to believe.
We all are aware of what Brett meant for the Packers, City, State and the fans as a player. Hopefully at some point this last year will be overshadowed by his total time spent in Green Bay as a member of the team.
It's amazing when news comes out now about Brett it's called 'Favre bashing' because things are coming out that some cannot believe Brett would do or say. The problem with that is that the latest comes from Favre and not the Packers.
Thompson? He's just happened to be the guy who was in the GM position to make the decision in the best interest of the future of the Green Bay Packers.
No I didnt think it was...
I didnt call hiim any names. I explained why I wrote it and I thought it was a pretty logical reason.
I still think in a way TT did not want Favre around. He was tired of him playing the retirement game with the org. and he wanted to move on. He was ready to see what Aaron Rodgers had to offer.
IMO thats not a bad thing for Ted to want.
I dont understand why anyone would take that as a bash.
I went back and re-read my post that you quoted and nowhere in there did I say Ted was a bad person for wanting what he wanted. I also never said anything about Favre-bashing so again Im not to sure why people are flying off the handle at what I said...
QUOTE (LMG @ Feb 17 2009, 07:34 AM)
Your statement is not a bash? C'mon!!
Some of you guys need to get your facts straight or heads out of the sand.
When Brett started his yearly waffling on whether he was going to play or not an opportunity came along to draft a potential replacement at QB and Thompson made Rodgers the selection. It was inevitable that some day Brett was 'really' going to retire and the Packers were preparing for that event as any smart team would do. Now look at the Jets position. Their QB should still be Pennington but Brett threw a wrench in there to and now they have to go out and find someone to lead the team at the most important position!
So Thompson is the bad guy for trading Brett? I don't think so and most people are finally waking up to that. Eh I'm not happy with everything he has done but the decision had to be made and it was.
The Packers moved on and rightfully so after Brett's teary farewell retirement news conference. We all believed him including the Packers and the time had come to move on as hard as it was to believe.
We all are aware of what Brett meant for the Packers, City, State and the fans as a player. Hopefully at some point this last year will be overshadowed by his total time spent in Green Bay as a member of the team.
It's amazing when news comes out now about Brett it's called 'Favre bashing' because things are coming out that some cannot believe Brett would do or say. The problem with that is that the latest comes from Favre and not the Packers.
Thompson? He's just happened to be the guy who was in the GM position to make the decision in the best interest of the future of the Green Bay Packers.
Some of you guys need to get your facts straight or heads out of the sand.
When Brett started his yearly waffling on whether he was going to play or not an opportunity came along to draft a potential replacement at QB and Thompson made Rodgers the selection. It was inevitable that some day Brett was 'really' going to retire and the Packers were preparing for that event as any smart team would do. Now look at the Jets position. Their QB should still be Pennington but Brett threw a wrench in there to and now they have to go out and find someone to lead the team at the most important position!
So Thompson is the bad guy for trading Brett? I don't think so and most people are finally waking up to that. Eh I'm not happy with everything he has done but the decision had to be made and it was.
The Packers moved on and rightfully so after Brett's teary farewell retirement news conference. We all believed him including the Packers and the time had come to move on as hard as it was to believe.
We all are aware of what Brett meant for the Packers, City, State and the fans as a player. Hopefully at some point this last year will be overshadowed by his total time spent in Green Bay as a member of the team.
It's amazing when news comes out now about Brett it's called 'Favre bashing' because things are coming out that some cannot believe Brett would do or say. The problem with that is that the latest comes from Favre and not the Packers.
Thompson? He's just happened to be the guy who was in the GM position to make the decision in the best interest of the future of the Green Bay Packers.
I dont feel it was a bash either. Thompson did not draft Rodgers to sit on the bench forever, no GM would. At some point he had to make the decision to cut bait so to say. No he is not the bad guy for trading Favre, not at all. Where I disagree with Thompson is not giving Favre a chance when we wanted to come back. What was Ted afraid of, Favre would beat out Rodgers, I thought Thompson liked competition. Would it have created a circus, sure, but the job of a GM is to put the best 53 players on the roster and have the 22 that give you the best chance to win. The Jets would not have let Pennington go if THEY thought he gave them the best chance to win. The Jets thought they had an upgrade, they were wrong.
Sure they needed to replace Favre at some point BUT the NFL is a win now league and you play to win now, not next year or the year after. Was it the right pick, I am not a Thompson supporter but yes it was and I said it at the time and say it now.
Thompson also did not do Favre any favors in Bretts eyes, he had the chance to upgrade at TE and never did, he never addressed the issues at OL when Rivera and Wahle left, the Moss saga
Brett Favre wanted to win and who can be critical of that. His record speaks for itself. Now its Ted Thompsons turn to make his mark in GB and the jury is very much out
QUOTE (packinatl @ Feb 16 2009, 05:56 PM)
The Jets would not have let Pennington go if THEY thought he gave them the best chance to win. The Jets thought they had an upgrade, they were wrong.
With Brett's cap coming in I think they had to unload Pennington.
QUOTE (LuvdaPack36 @ Feb 16 2009, 07:40 PM)
I didnt call hiim any names. I explained why I wrote it and I thought it was a pretty logical reason.
A bash need not include derogatory names and whether or not it's logical is besides the point. Let's review your statement
QUOTE
TT finally got rid of Favre
There's no way that can be interpreted other than TT is looking to get rid of Favre, has been looking to get rid of him for a long time, and with a strong implication of animus on the part of TT towards Favre. However TT's job is to work towards the good of the team w/out any animus to a particular player and thus to imply that he acted in such an unprofessional manner is a bash on his character and his handling of the GM duties. Particularly in light of the conversations that covered this topic over the last year.
What if someone wrote:
QUOTE
Favre finally retired
I don't think that could be seen as a positive comment about Favre nor could it be construed as neutral statement announcing Favre's retirement.
So you're free to your opinion and it may be the case that your opinion is the correct one; however it is an attack on TT. Let's be honest about that.
QUOTE (LMG @ Feb 17 2009, 08:14 AM)
With Brett's cap coming in I think they had to unload Pennington.
sure they did but it they thought that Pennington gave them a better chance to win they would NOT have made the trade
QUOTE (PackerBronco @ Feb 16 2009, 08:21 PM)
A bash need not include derogatory names and whether or not it's logical is besides the point. Let's review your statement
There's no way that can be interpreted other than TT is looking to get rid of Favre, has been looking to get rid of him for a long time, and with a strong implication of animus on the part of TT towards Favre. However TT's job is to work towards the good of the team w/out any animus to a particular player and thus to imply that he acted in such an unprofessional manner is a bash on his character and his handling of the GM duties. Particularly in light of the conversations that covered this topic over the last year.
What if someone wrote:
I don't think that could be seen as a positive comment about Favre nor could it be construed as neutral statement announcing Favre's retirement.
So you're free to your opinion and it may be the case that your opinion is the correct one; however it is an attack on TT. Let's be honest about that.
There's no way that can be interpreted other than TT is looking to get rid of Favre, has been looking to get rid of him for a long time, and with a strong implication of animus on the part of TT towards Favre. However TT's job is to work towards the good of the team w/out any animus to a particular player and thus to imply that he acted in such an unprofessional manner is a bash on his character and his handling of the GM duties. Particularly in light of the conversations that covered this topic over the last year.
What if someone wrote:
I don't think that could be seen as a positive comment about Favre nor could it be construed as neutral statement announcing Favre's retirement.
So you're free to your opinion and it may be the case that your opinion is the correct one; however it is an attack on TT. Let's be honest about that.
I have been honest about it.
I also find it convient that you dont post where I have said ad nauseum since you came after me that TT had the right to do whatever he wanted and I didnt think it was a bad thing for wanting to move on
Again, I apologize that you took it the wrong way.
A lot of this has been on the verge of total nauseous for quite awhile.
Here is what I think is a good article that says a lot and we put up on the Front Page on the 14th.
Here is what I think is a good article that says a lot and we put up on the Front Page on the 14th.
QUOTE (LuvdaPack36 @ Feb 16 2009, 08:24 PM)
I have been honest about it.
I also find it convient that you dont post where I have said ad nauseum since you came after me that TT had the right to do whatever he wanted and I didnt think it was a bad thing for wanting to move on
Again, I apologize that you took it the wrong way.
I also find it convient that you dont post where I have said ad nauseum since you came after me that TT had the right to do whatever he wanted and I didnt think it was a bad thing for wanting to move on
Again, I apologize that you took it the wrong way.
No big deal and I apologize for calling your honesty into question.
QUOTE (The GM @ Feb 17 2009, 06:08 AM)
Couldnt care less about the reasons he can back. He isnt throwing picks in big games for the Packer any longer. One thing is for sure, he sure stuck it to Ted by leading the NFL in interceptions and proving what any logical fan knew long ago.
Nice zeal.
Well, the important thing here is that everybody lost on this deal.
Favre physically broke down causing a major late season collapse that cost his team a playoff berth. Teammates and newspapers called him out, treating him in a way that he had never been treated in GB.
The Packers finished 6-10 and lost out on a nice 2nd round pick when the Jets collapsed. The franchise took a pretty big PR hit with fans and didn't make up for it on the field.
Hopefully that's that, but I have my doubts. Brett's gonna try to come back. When Ed Werder asked him about coming back favre looked uncomfortable and put his hand over his mouth as he spoke, which I took as a subconscious sign of lying. Hope he proves me wrong.
Favre physically broke down causing a major late season collapse that cost his team a playoff berth. Teammates and newspapers called him out, treating him in a way that he had never been treated in GB.
The Packers finished 6-10 and lost out on a nice 2nd round pick when the Jets collapsed. The franchise took a pretty big PR hit with fans and didn't make up for it on the field.
Hopefully that's that, but I have my doubts. Brett's gonna try to come back. When Ed Werder asked him about coming back favre looked uncomfortable and put his hand over his mouth as he spoke, which I took as a subconscious sign of lying. Hope he proves me wrong.
QUOTE (rpiotr01 @ Feb 17 2009, 11:44 AM)
Hopefully that's that, but I have my doubts. Brett's gonna try to come back. When Ed Werder asked him about coming back favre looked uncomfortable and put his hand over his mouth as he spoke, which I took as a subconscious sign of lying. Hope he proves me wrong.
Time will tell. I think he is done though. I was actually hoping he would give the Jets one more season.
QUOTE (Packer Backer NY @ Feb 17 2009, 05:11 PM)
Time will tell. I think he is done though. I was actually hoping he would give the Jets one more season.
I was too, truth be told. One more season after an offseason training with that guy in Mississippi that he trained with prior to the '07 season. Brett made a big mistake last year (I'm only speaking professionally, as a player) by not going through the offseason training. I believe if he had, the Jets would definitely have been in the playoffs and might have made a little noise. This year is tricker, because of the condition of his biceps. Had he trained last offseason, the arm might never have become a problem for him.
QUOTE (packinatl @ Feb 16 2009, 12:38 PM)
At the end of the day Brett Favre is not the first professional athlete to want to "stick it" to their old team and he will not be the last. Talk about a non story
I thought he said he wanted to stick it to Ted, not the Packers?
QUOTE (Terry @ Feb 17 2009, 12:52 PM)
I was too, truth be told. One more season after an offseason training with that guy in Mississippi that he trained with prior to the '07 season. Brett made a big mistake last year (I'm only speaking professionally, as a player) by not going through the offseason training. I believe if he had, the Jets would definitely have been in the playoffs and might have made a little noise. This year is tricker, because of the condition of his biceps. Had he trained last offseason, the arm might never have become a problem for him.
You could be right about that. Or maybe this was a fluke injury that would have happened regardless. We'll probably never really know but I think an offseason training program is out the window and ven if Brett wanted to play again, I think this injury would greatly affect his performance.
Retired...he will stay.... for now....
Favre has said he will more then likely feel the urge to play but that he knows the Jets wont cut him and does not want to put the Jets GM in that postion.n 
QUOTE (Packer Backer NY @ Feb 17 2009, 12:07 PM)
You could be right about that. Or maybe this was a fluke injury that would have happened regardless. We'll probably never really know but I think an offseason training program is out the window and ven if Brett wanted to play again, I think this injury would greatly affect his performance.
Retired...he will stay.... for now....
Retired...he will stay.... for now....
Or, as I suspect, it was just an old injury/problem that became convenient to use. The initial reports were that there was calcification in the tear. Calcification takes time to build up. If it was a fresh tear near the end of the season, it wouldn't have any build up on it.
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=119&sid=1561655
QUOTE
Favre, who also reportedly has some calcification in the area of the injury, is expected to take several weeks to decide whether he will return to the Jets, ESPN reported.
http://wcbstv.com/breakingnewsalerts/brett...y.2.897250.html
QUOTE
According to a published report, Favre is suffering from a torn biceps tendon in his right shoulder and some calcification in the area, injuries which do not require extensive surgery
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/1...-biceps-tendon/
QUOTE
Brett Favre has been told by doctors that pain in his right shoulder is from a torn biceps tendon and some calcification in the area,
Here is some information about it and it fits exactly what Favre was experiencing.
http://arthritis-symptom.com/tendonitis/ca...-tendonitis.htm
http://arthritis-symptom.com/tendonitis/te...information.htm
QUOTE
Tendonitis usually occurs in individuals in middle or old age because it is often the result of overuse over a long period of time.
Tendons that commonly become inflamed include:
* Tendons of the hand
* Tendons of the upper arm that effect the shoulder
* Achilles tendon and the tendon that runs across the top of the foot.
Tendons that commonly become inflamed include:
* Tendons of the hand
* Tendons of the upper arm that effect the shoulder
* Achilles tendon and the tendon that runs across the top of the foot.
If you check out the info in both links, it sounds like Brett got bad tendentious from overuse over a long time. He's just getting old. It can be cleaned up, but it will come back.
QUOTE (Heatseeker @ Feb 16 2009, 04:56 PM)
I can guarantee every single person on this board at least once in their life has felt that very same urge. Be careful getting down from those high horses you all reside on.
I agree with you about the high horses - but then, I agreed with Jimmy Carter about the lust in his heart comments, which earned him a great deal of unjust derision, imo. But I have to differ with you about Favre's behaviour coming down to mere 'urges'. Yes, you're right, we do all feel those urges, to stick it to someone when we're sore. But we don't all act on them - and that's a significant difference. Furthermore, even fewer of us act on them when we have to go out of our way to do so, or when it requires a significant passage of time to carry out our plans.
QUOTE (packinatl @ Feb 16 2009, 05:24 PM)
It has been reported that McCarthy was asking Favre "if he was coming back" not we "want you back". Splitting hairs maybe. But never once have I read that the Packer organization went to Favre and said we want you back. They pressed him for an answer if he wanted to come back, that's it. Big difference IMO
I'm sorry, but I think this demonstrates the height of bias. You start out by saying it might be splitting hairs, but then you end the paragraph by deciding it's a big difference. Furthermore, you interpret their contacts with Brett prior to March as pressing him for an answer, in spite of the things they said they were doing (i.e., in terms of their intentions/motivations). So you're not only speculating and passing it off as fact, but you're speculating in opposition to the only evidence you have, which reasons are equally possible and reasonable (that is, that they did NOT want to push him, because they were sympathetic to the difficulty of the decision).
Now, I'm willing to accept a reluctance to take their statements purely at face value, considering that there are elements of self-interest in portraying things the way they did. But that's far short of actually deciding that the fact of the matter is something else entirely, without any basis or even supporting logic. There's a big difference between a healthy degree of scepticism and downright total cynicism.
As for the splitting hairs/big difference, it is splitting hairs - in the worst way. I know very well that a subtle difference in word choice can make a difference, but in this case, it's splitting hairs in appearance only. They said publicly they wanted him back. They were in regular contact with him, to ask him about coming back. You can parse their sentences all day long, it doesn't change the facts of the matter. They did the same things they did the previous season, at least by their account.
Let's take worse case scenario, short of considering Machiavellian political machinations on their part. Let's say, for the sake of consideration, that they had mixed emotions. On the one hand, they had a very aged QB who had just had the season of his life. On the other, they had a young QB waiting patiently in the wings and they might have felt they had reason to be concerned about the effect on that QB. Furthermore, if the ageing QB started to slide badly midseason, they knew they'd be faced with the question of whether to bench him and all of the fallout that would entail.
So let's say they had these mixed emotions and misgivings - they were willing to continue with him, but they had some misgivings. So, in that case, why call him at all? They could publicly say the same thing they did say, which was that they didn't want to pressure him, that they knew it was a difficult decision for him, and leave it at that. They didn't need to call him to ask him if he was coming back. The very fact that they called him at all is a clear indication that the door is open to him. For you to interpret that as some hidden contrary message that they were telling him that they didn't want him back is more than a reach, imo. It's fantastic. (And for Brett to say "crickets" is, as someone suggested, the height of disingenuousness.)
Now, let's take another scenario - let's say they did want him back, but obviously they wanted him back in top form. How Brett felt about his capacity at that age might have been very important. Maybe they really didn't want to pressure him, just as they say. It's delicate between professional adults. They know he's a loyal guy, an emotional guy, who might feel obligated to return - which would be the wrong reason to return. So maybe they felt it would be best to approach him as neutrally as possible, trusting that their public pronouncements AND the very fact that they regularly contacted him would be more than sufficient for Brett to know that the door was open, but there was no pressure so that he could decide either way, comfortably.
All this talk about what Thompson or McCarthy should or should not have said; all this tendency to fall back on the comfortable position of "they were both at fault" is just so much hooey. They were not both at fault. The Packers let Brett know they wanted him back, they gave him time to make his decision, he made his decision and they went forward with plans accordingly. There is NO fault on the Packers' side for any of that. When later, quite late in the offseason actually, he threw a wrench in the works by saying he wanted to come back, then they were in a helluva fix. At that point, it would be nearly impossible for them to come out smelling like roses.
The only other thing the Packers could have done was simply release him, which would not be the smart business approach OR football approach, but it might - might - have been a better political approach (but even then, I suspect they were in a lose/lose position with the fans).
This disdain for Ted Thompson, which dates back to 2005, is just rather mind boggling to me. Reggie White wanted to come back after retiring, the Packers said no, and he signed with another team. Wolf didn't get any of this s$$t for the decision. There was none of this nonsense about how it was half Wolf's fault, at the very least. I don't know if Reggie's contract was up, but I would presume so because otherwise the Packers would have gotten something for him.
This either/or mindset which makes of this some huge battle is only a figment of fans' imagination. I'm not coming down heavily on Favre, though I do think he played it all out like a boob, running hither and yon to put his foot in his mouth. But he's only human and I don't fault him for that. He wanted to come back, fine. He pushed the issue, fine. The team had to trade him, fine. He went on to make disparaging remarks about the organization that had made him rich and famous - or enabled it, rather - and that's not so fine. Not a question of evil, exactly - he's still a good guy with a good heart, albeit somewhat adolescent. Probably pretty much like all southern macho overachievers, frankly. No big deal. But that Brett's sins are merely venial and not mortal, does not translate through some process of alchemy into meaning that Thompson is also guilty of venial sins in the matter. That's just plain ridiculous. (PS. I use 'sin' here purely metaphorically, as obviously sin does not enter into it - at least not in the terms of this dialogue.)
However you slice it, however, responding to the title of this thread, it was petty of Favre to ACT on the URGE to let any aspect of spite to enter into his decision. But as Heat says, we all have pettiness within us, so it's hardly a major issue, nor does it take away anything from his achievements as a player.
QUOTE (Terry @ Feb 17 2009, 12:30 PM)
I agree with you about the high horses - but then, I agreed with Jimmy Carter about the lust in his heart comments, which earned him a great deal of unjust derision, imo. But I have to differ with you about Favre's behaviour coming down to mere 'urges'. Yes, you're right, we do all feel those urges, to stick it to someone when we're sore. But we don't all act on them - and that's a significant difference. Furthermore, even fewer of us act on them when we have to go out of our way to do so, or when it requires a significant passage of time to carry out our plans.
Oh I agree with you on that Terry,
But I don't think Favre coming back was solely done to stick it to Ted. IMO, Brett assumed he would be playing with the Pack when he announced he was coming back. When it turned into what it did, Brett said that he, "just wanted to play".
At that point, it was too late. He was at a point of no return. He basically had to go and play wherever they traded him to or risk looking like (IMO) an even bigger fool.
So, I think deep down, yes -- he wanted to play football, and that was his main reasoning behind coming back. But when it came to him not being able to play for the Pack, I think that reasoning shifted -- albeit, not completely -- to wanting to stick it to Thompson.
You know lot of people bring Thompson into this as 'the person who did not want Brett'.
In reality when Brett reported to GB and flunked the mental physical with McCarthy Thompson was the just the guy then with the job of hopefully finding a trade partner so Brett could keep playing football.
In reality when Brett reported to GB and flunked the mental physical with McCarthy Thompson was the just the guy then with the job of hopefully finding a trade partner so Brett could keep playing football.
All this does is prove what all of us "Favre-haters" have been saying for months now: Favre is selfish and didn't really care about the Packers or the fans. It was a paycheck that kept him here - not a love for the team or fans.
The simple fact of the matter is, he put a petty grudge between him and Thompson ahead of the Packers as a whole and the fans that loved him for nearly two decades. If he'd had things his way, he would have been traded to the Packers' biggest current rival, beating them twice in the regular season and then beating us for a division title - fans be damned.
This is the guy some of you have undying adoration for. I could care less if his number was never retired, and if he was never inducted into the Packers' HOF. Give his number to the next punter we sign.
Ugh, the more Favre says, the more bitter I am for supporting this guy over the years. He wanted to see the Packers buried last year because of a feud with one guy.
The simple fact of the matter is, he put a petty grudge between him and Thompson ahead of the Packers as a whole and the fans that loved him for nearly two decades. If he'd had things his way, he would have been traded to the Packers' biggest current rival, beating them twice in the regular season and then beating us for a division title - fans be damned.
This is the guy some of you have undying adoration for. I could care less if his number was never retired, and if he was never inducted into the Packers' HOF. Give his number to the next punter we sign.
Ugh, the more Favre says, the more bitter I am for supporting this guy over the years. He wanted to see the Packers buried last year because of a feud with one guy.
QUOTE (GBP4EVER @ Feb 16 2009, 10:09 PM)
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...ml?eref=writers
He now admits part of the reason he came back was to stick it to Ted. Kind of petty if you ask me and the wrong reason to play.
He now admits part of the reason he came back was to stick it to Ted. Kind of petty if you ask me and the wrong reason to play.
He's a great competitor so he wanted to come back and show people he could still play. He was having a good season up until his arm got hurt. His team was 8-3 and he was playing at a high level. Minus the throwing arm injury, the Jets would have made the playoffs.
Question: Is this even news? I mean we all knew that Favre came back to stick it to the Packers/Ted. They didnt want him and that didnt sit well with him and he wanted to prove to them that they should of kept him. But in the end he just proved Ted made the right choice. We got a 3rd round draft pick for a guy that did nothing for the his new team, outside of sale some jerseys and tickets.
I could write pages on what happen and who is to blame, but at the end of the day it comes down to one thing for me and why its Favre fault and why he can only look at himself for how things happen.
He retired.
Throw everything else out the window, anything you can think of. At the end of the day he gave up his power when he retired the first time. I mean lets say Ted wanted to get rid of Favre, in the worse way. Ted wouldnt be stupid to just act on this impluse otherwise he would have to face the fans and that is one fight he wouldnt be able to win. Ted needed a good reason to do it, he couldnt just trade Favre to trade Favre.
Now I know Green Bay pressured him, they forced the issue. They bugged him to make a choice. My first response to statements like that is: So? Favre knew he had power and knew if he wanted to he could wait until well after the draft to make a choice on his future. Heck he was given that benefit the last 4 or 5 years here and again Ted wouldnt of acted on the situation until Favre giving him an out unless Ted is crazy and was willing to deal with negative fan reaction.
So in the end Favre is to blame. Is he in the wrong for reitring and wanting to unretire? No, but he has to realize that he cant leave home and then come back in acouple of months and expect that he is still going to have a place there. He was going to move on so the team moved on. If Favre had a problem with Ted why not keep doing his "will I or wont I act"? He would be holding Ted up and sticking it to him even more. Ted wouldnt know if its still Favre teams or Rodgers teams, he wouldnt know how much cap space he would have, etc. If Favre really wanted to stick it to Ted he should of stayed around.
I dont know its old news, at least to packer fans. We all knew he came back for the wrong reasons. I mean if all he wanted to do was just play football because it was still his passion any team would of been fine, but no he wanted it to be the Vikings. That right there told you what his intentions were.
I could write pages on what happen and who is to blame, but at the end of the day it comes down to one thing for me and why its Favre fault and why he can only look at himself for how things happen.
He retired.
Throw everything else out the window, anything you can think of. At the end of the day he gave up his power when he retired the first time. I mean lets say Ted wanted to get rid of Favre, in the worse way. Ted wouldnt be stupid to just act on this impluse otherwise he would have to face the fans and that is one fight he wouldnt be able to win. Ted needed a good reason to do it, he couldnt just trade Favre to trade Favre.
Now I know Green Bay pressured him, they forced the issue. They bugged him to make a choice. My first response to statements like that is: So? Favre knew he had power and knew if he wanted to he could wait until well after the draft to make a choice on his future. Heck he was given that benefit the last 4 or 5 years here and again Ted wouldnt of acted on the situation until Favre giving him an out unless Ted is crazy and was willing to deal with negative fan reaction.
So in the end Favre is to blame. Is he in the wrong for reitring and wanting to unretire? No, but he has to realize that he cant leave home and then come back in acouple of months and expect that he is still going to have a place there. He was going to move on so the team moved on. If Favre had a problem with Ted why not keep doing his "will I or wont I act"? He would be holding Ted up and sticking it to him even more. Ted wouldnt know if its still Favre teams or Rodgers teams, he wouldnt know how much cap space he would have, etc. If Favre really wanted to stick it to Ted he should of stayed around.
I dont know its old news, at least to packer fans. We all knew he came back for the wrong reasons. I mean if all he wanted to do was just play football because it was still his passion any team would of been fine, but no he wanted it to be the Vikings. That right there told you what his intentions were.
QUOTE (sinatra @ Feb 17 2009, 02:53 PM)
All this does is prove what all of us "Favre-haters" have been saying for months now: Favre is selfish and didn't really care about the Packers or the fans. It was a paycheck that kept him here - not a love for the team or fans.
More and more, posts like this are making me think that it's mostly the "Favre-haters" who had an undying adoration for Favre, and that's why they're so upset over what happened.
Personally, I don't care one bit if he loved the team or the fans.
QUOTE (sinatra @ Feb 17 2009, 01:53 PM)
All this does is prove what all of us "Favre-haters" have been saying for months now:
No, it doesn't, "prove" a damn thing.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.