http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/1032537...-Thompson-wrong

His rant is a bit much but his core point about TT not willing to surround Brett with the necessary talent is something I have believed since TT came to GB. He tried to build for the future at the expense of the present. Unfortunately, we are finding out his ability to build for the future isn't working either. Not trying to get Randy Moss harder was just stubbornness. Being a Packer fan is in my blood but it sure has been painful for the last several years.

What doesn't make any since is, if all Favre was upset about was not surrounding him with talent - why retire after a 13-3 season? I could see retiring after 8-8 or 4-12 but why after being one play away from the Superbowl? It would seem that he had the talent around him in 2007 to contend and it was Thompson put that talent around him.

This is the part of the article that I found miss-informed.

How do you leave out Favre's waffling about retirement each off-season before this unless it didn't fit in with the story you wanted to write.

Favre certainly has game left in him and he got his revenge last week but this article IMO is a very one sided description of what happened.

Good article by Whitlock. He doesn't mince words, thats for sure. The comparison of Krause and Thompson is an interesting one. I might disagree with his opinion that Favre is the MVP. Top five though. His teammate Allen is in the running as well.

The fact that he calls Favre the Packers' QB of the future is idiotic. Rodgers is a top 10 QB. You don't pass on those when you've got a QB that's approaching 40.

By the way, it's not as if drafting Rodgers somehow cost Favre a weapon. The only potential offensive weapons drafted in the first round were Roddy White and Heath Miller. They're both good players, but we already had great receivers. It's not as if Thompson passed on a top tier RB to get Rodgers instead.

Also this Moss stuff is getting old. Moss never wanted to be a Packer! The Packers had a deal in place with the Raiders for a 5th rounder. But then Brady calls Moss and the Pats offer a 4th for him and the deal is closed with the Packers finding out on tv the next morning that the pats got him. The Packers never were offered a chance to counter it. Blaming TT for it is unfair since he did have a deal in place but had the Raiders back out on him without a fair chance to counter.

I love Whitlock and think this article is pretty on. However, he does contradict himself just a tad bit. He talks about how what Favre is doing is unprecedented -- performing at this level at his age.

But then says the Packers, in 2005, already had their QB of the future. Well, if I were a betting man (thank god I'm not) I would have bet back in 2005 that by the time Brett was 40 years-old, he would either be retired, or, if he was still playing, that he wouldn't be playing like he is. It's just playing the odds. Good odds at that.

So really, Thompson had no idea that even a guy like Favre -- who has made a career at defying the odds -- would be doing it this long. So I can't blame Thompson for the Rodgers pick.

Everything else though, I agree with Whitlock on. At least to some degree. The Moss thing has been discussed ad nauseum, but I think if Thompson would have pursued him a bit harder and closed the deal before he went to bed that night, Moss would have been a Packer. Like Whitlock said, it's a win now league. Thompson has had opportunities for 5 years now to make the team a legit contender. So far, we've had one good season. Meanwhile, teams like the Falcons, who have drafted well AND used free agency to supplement the team's talent have gone from atrocious and the laughing stock of the league, to surprise......legit contender. Things can turn around fast in the NFL. Not everything has to be looked at in the context of a 5-year plan.

Why is Jason Whitlock still working? I would assume his crystal ball good fortune would have hit him a lottery winning or two by now. If Whitlock knew Favre was capable of what would be a career-high in passer rating at age 40, well, he's a better man than I.

That point, of course, would have more relevance if the season were over. It isn't. You don't need a crystall ball to see that Favre has faded down the stretch the past few seasons--often dramatically. Being Mr. October in football isn't a compliment.

Also where was Whitlock last year when Favre looked like a broken down has been and Rodger outplayed him by far? Fact is where the Packers have picked since Rodgers was drafted no QB good as Rodgers has been there. So therefore Rodgers was a smart pick to make.

Favre: 10-6 Played hurt down the stretch, on a new team, in a new system and still found ways to win.
Rodgers: 6-10 Had a great "rookie" starting season.......

I'll take the "W's" over statistics everyday of the week. And twice on Sunday's.



Joe Flacco?
Matt Ryan?

I would take them both over Rodgers. Rodgers was not the only good QB ever drafted.

Agree completely. Like most in the media, he's always been a big time Favre cheerleader. He's been wanting to write this article since they "dumped" Favre. Saying he already had his QB of the future is about the dumbest thing I've ever seen in "print". Did he completely miss the fact that Favre was publically contemplating retirement at the time? Even if he somehow knew back in 2005 that a guy who's played every game for 17 years wouldn't be worn down by age 40, how do you blame Ted Thompson for taking Favre at his word?

But maybe that's always been TT's mistake as it relates to Favre. He's taken Favre's words at face value. He believed Favre when he said he wasn't sure he was coming back. Year after year. He believed him again when he said he was retired after the 2007 season. It now seems fairly obvious that at least the early years of the annual "should I retire or keep playing" drama were more ways to avoid offseason work and/or trying to pressure TT into making the moves he wanted, or just to have his ego stroked. So I guess we can criticize him for being naive.

And then he compounds his idiocy by saying Brees and Manning aren't MVP candidates because of Favre, too. And he apparently completely missed that Drew Brees' team was also undefeated:



The guy doesn't seem to do any research before writing his articles. He's going to tell me that Drew Brees with rediculous stats taking an 8-8 team and having them undefeated through 7 games doesn't put him in the discussion, but Favre taking a 10-6 team from last year and having them 7-1 at the midpoint makes him a stone cold lock for the award. Yeah, real objective.

First I said where the Packers picked and neither Ryan and Flacco where there. Also I would not take either of those two over Rodgers. Esp Flacco he is not as near as talneted as Rodgers is IMO.

It is very frustrating to watch these teams get a lot better and make good draft choices and free agent pick ups.

When you single out one free agent miss, like Moss, it doesn't look so bad. But when you review the collection of missed draft picks (or head scratching draft picks) and missed (did he even really pursue them??) free agent signings, then the picture becomes quite clear.

clear enough to see that our team has taken big steps backwards. Sure, we can still beat the worst teams in the NFL. But we are no match for the good teams. Especially when they have something to prove. It used to be the reverse.

Oh, I see. You meant during that particular draft...? Yes, then we got the best QB.

I just didn't think getting Rodgers at the time would really help us win.... that year or for the next 3 or 4. I thought it was a wasted pick and in some ways, I still do.

Not knocking Roders talent as I like him and think he is very good. I would just have rather got someone who could start immediately, fill a need and help us win. Then and now.



I would take them both. Both that is just my opinion. You could certainly be right on that. Time will tell.

I would take Ryan. But no way I take Flacco.

Not to mention, both of those guys were picked BEFORE the Packers picked. But hey, why let facts and good sense get in the way.

Trading Favre and keeping Rodgers was the correct decision. Period.

They wanted Favre gone because he developed a consistent record of performing worse as the season went on. They felt he was not the guy that could take them to and through a Super Bowl.

NONE of that has been disproven by what Favre did last year or what's going on this year. If anything last year proved they were right, and we're only just now at the half way point of this season.

Please, can't we wait until the end of the season to judge? If he's holding the Lombardi in February, or heck, even doing interviews in Miami in late January, then you know what? That's it. Thompson was wrong, because that will prove that the problem wasn't Favre, it was not putting enough overall talent on the field. That still wouldn't say much about whether moving on without Favre was the right thing for GB to do, but it will prove that Favre could still be a solution, not the problem. Until then this is just nonsense.

Ryan looks like Manning V2. I'm not sure about Flacco. The only game I've ever seen him play was against the Vikings this year and he looked a lot better than Rodgers did. That said, he did have Ray Rice running wild, and a much better OL; so it's hard to tell. Bottom line is, we are super fortunate to have had a HOF QB and transition immediately to a Pro Bowl-caliber QB in Rodgers. That's just unbelivably rare no matter how you shake it.

That all said, Thompson has been far from perfect. I've called him on it many times. As have others. Doesn't mean I (and I suspect others, too) don't like the guy. We're all rooting for him to pick the next Joe Thomas next year in the draft, or make a trade or FA acquisition that lands us another Charles Woodson. Based on his track record however, I'm not holding my breath.

But I am cheering.

This article angers me. I respected Whitlock. I've read many of his articles. He is not afraid to call things the way they really are.

This piece looks like he is just pounding the keyboard to stir the pot. Last year he wrote an article on Favre having a bigger ego than TO and many others. Now he claims Favre is the smartest man in football, if not on the earth. Excuse me Mr. Whitlock, but when did you decide to slither?

I know you can be both smart and egotistical, but to imply Favre planned this whole thing, is nuts.

So Favre new when TT didn't get Moss it was time to get out of town? Favre went on to waffle, then retire, then comeback, then get himself traded to The Jets, then retire, then get his release, then get surgery, then waffle about The Vikings, then decide to play for them, and Favre figured this out and planned it 2 or 3 years ago???

“Favre spent one year in New York just so he could get to Minnesota and prove that Ted Thompson is a moron."

Yes Mr. Whitlock, Favre knew when he took the Jets job he would cave in the second half of the season just so he could retire and get his release. Quite a plan, I'm surprised Favre didn't pull it off a year sooner.

This column appears to be Mr. Whitlock’s attempt to ingratiate himself into the sports writers and sports broadcasters (Favre) Kiss Ass Club.

I will still read Mr. Whitlock's columns, but from an entertainment standpoint. Mr. Whitlock was just erased from my list of legitimate writers.

Lot of that goes on...everywhere!

Allow me to go out on a limb here: this article is about one to five to ten years premature. To make this kind of assertion at the halfway point of this season is foolish, and to make this assessment only one and a half seasons into Aaron Rodgers playing career is ... well ... naive.
For one thing, nobody has any idea if Favre is even going to be mobile in January. I keep going back to him not having any kind of real offseason training program, coming off of arm surgery, and being 40 years old. If you were going to mortgage your house on a football bet, would you mortgage it on Brett Favre staying healthy and dominant all the way through to the Super Bowl? Based on what evidence?
And rolling it back, I'm still trying to figure out how the Packers are any better last year with Favre then without him. Maybe two games? Three? That's if he doesn't blow his arm out like he did with the Jets, since his crash and burn routine took place at the same time the Packers were sputtering.
And, of course, what nobody talks about when it comes to Favre staying in Green Bay was the great huge gorilla in the room: Favre's too old to be effective in frigid weather. He just is. As great as he played in 2007, he flat out sucked when the weather conditions were bad, please see the NFC Championship Game. If you're the Packers, your QB not being able to cope with sub zero weather is a big, big problem.
Long story short, this was a copy and save article.

Why are we still debating this.

Committing to Rodgers after Favre waffled was the correct thing to do, period. And thats coming from a Favre fan.

All this does is provide a distraction to the real issue, the fact that Ted has had, since 2006, some pretty poor offseason's. This team has holes folks, and it isn't at QB.

I agree. Favre is done and over with. He is the least of our problems right now.

I thought we were discussing the Whitlock article and not Favre?

But otherwise I agree.

I thought the Whitlock article was about Favre?

The guys article is spot on

It is amazing to see so many who trumpeted is excellence when he was carving up Favre now call him a hack once he writes a pro Favre article. Very interesting.

He has been a good writer for a lot of years. He is known and respected nationally. Criticizing Ted Thompson is still taboo around certain circles.