I don't see this as such a horrible problem for the Packers. If they keep him they are clear favorites in the NFC North again; so they pissed off Rogers, big deal.

If they are sold on Rogers trade Favre to an AFC team and you get some assets back in return.

So many seem worried about the optics - Brett Favre in another uniform - people would get over that pretty fast.

you know... I almost hope it works out that Favre plays for the Bears. Just to watch so many exploding heads across the Midwest that the CDC gets involved.

If we ignore 2005 and 2006, then yeah it's easy to say that Favre would make Baltimore's offense better. I think Favre would be making a huge mistake by coming back.

If Favre goes to Baltimore, all four AFC North starting QBs will have gone to the Pro Bowl in the past two years. Not a good division to be a DB in.

I don't see how the Ravens defense is any more likely to stay healthy this year as guys like Lewis, McAllister, Pryce and Rolle are ancient and are likely to get hurt again, which when added to a normal amount of injuries should stop them contending in a tough division. To make matters worse, the offensive line is a bit of a mess following Odgen's retirement.

Favre should go to Chicago or Minnesota and if I were No 4 I'd wait and see if McKinnie will be playing this year. If he's going to be the Viking's left tackle then Favre should play in Minnesota but if McKinnie is suiting up for the mean machine then he should play for the Bears. Both the Bears and the Vikings are good enough on defense that they would both be serious superbowl contenders with Favre.

To me, there was only one interesting bit in all of this: '...Pittsburgh [is] likely to decline this season.'Wasn't there some info last week that Amazon will start shipping PFP today?

Why exactly does PK think Favre is coming back? Because he threw a few passes to some high school receivers. Because PK thinks he's bored?Until Favre actually says "I'm back", I'm just going to assume every story related to him is much ado about nothing. I think this is just wishful thinking on PK's part.

Isn't Green Bay like $30M under the cap?

Whats to keep them from just saying "If you come back Brett, you're riding the pine."

I really doubt he'd come back if he knew he'd be coming back to riding the bench.

Re: #7. I agree there's nothing new here to make me think Favre is coming out of retirement. It's just PK getting in on a hot but cooling off topic during the offseason doldrums. There is a lot of "I think" and "I believe" in the article, and not a single "When I caught Brett on his private, only-for-Peter-King cell phone".

King is 2-for-2 on pages of the article containing vomit-related metaphors (the first of which is misspelled).

What an odd peek into his subconscious...

If the Packers braintrust really DON'T want Favre to un-retire, then it's pretty easy to deter him from doing so, or at least from hurting the team the way that King talks about (either by playing for someone else or by keeping Rogers from starting).

Simply designate Rodgers as the starter and Favre, if he returns, as the backup. And stick to it.

This of course, assumes that they have the ability to take Favre's cap hit, and the guts to keep him on the bench if Rodgers struggles. But assuming that they can make Favre think they do, then he probably won't unretire. Favre wants to come back to play starting QB. I don't think he wants to come back to lead scout teams and sit on the bench on Sundays.

If McCarthy really thinks that it is in the team's best long term interest to be starting Rodgers next year and not Favre, then...start Rodgers next year, regardless of if you have Favre. You're fortunate enough to control his rights, so you can either trade him, pay to keep him on the bench and away from Chicagasota, or release him and watch your two division rivals get into a bidding war over a good, but aging and mistake prone gunslinging QB who has at most a year left.

I have a solution for this issue, where Brett gets to play and nobody has to see him don a uniform he's never worn before...trade him to the Falcons.

I dislike the ravens intensely but I think Aaron's on to something. They appear to have the cap room to pay Favre for one (or two) years and if the defense stays healthy and if they get 2006 McNair out of Favre then Voila! another 13-3 season. It sure looks like Flacco (and Smith) would benefit more from sitting than playing this year and Boller can be a competent backup.

#11: Strictly speaking, he would be wearing a different uniform if he played for the Falcons now...

/pedantic

I just can't understand the Vikings and Bears angle to this speculation. I know both teams really need a QB, but I don't see how it could happen. I would think the Pack would take anything they could get in trade to stop that from happening.

PK is absolutely desperate about a post-Favre NFL. I'm surprised he didn't just retire himself. What good is the NFL without the warrior, the wild gunslinger, the savior of Wisconsin? So, remember, this is all wishful thinking, and PK is going to interpret every suppressed sneeze as a sign that Favre's putting his cleats back on.

10: However, the Bears and the Vikings defenses are good enough that they would be legitimate superbowl contenders with him, and that could be worth a lot to them.

For example, with Favre at qb, the Bears other offensive problems would be attenuated. Williams will probably have problems as a rookie but Favre's lightning release would disguise them, safeties couldn't stack up in the box against the run and so Forte would be more successful and Hester could enjoy running under some Favre bombs. The Bears defense should play at the level it did in their superbowl run and in an NFC that's without any truly great sides they could win it all. If I were the Bears I'd trade my 1st round pick and then it starts to become worth the Packer's while to trade him. What if the Bears offered Hester in a straght swap?

I can see Favre moving and even within his division.

Would this be a good time to ask the question: how the hell was Favre the SI Sportsman of the Year for 2007?

Did we not see Favre throw away the NFC championship game with a pathetically underthrown interception?

Is there anybody in the NFL who has been more overrated than Favre for the past five years?

I really am sick and tired of Favre's attention -seeking. Play or don't play - I really don't give a crap.

Favre of the mid to late 90s was the best QB in the NFL. Favre right now is not.

Here's a solution: Take Favre back and trade Rodgers.

Re: 10 - But assuming that they can make Favre think they do, then he probably won’t unretire.

I think you're right, but if Favre decides to call them on it they have a bunch of potential problems. Think Chad Johnson distraction level times ten.

I really am sick and tired of Favre’s attention -seeking. Play or don’t play - I really don’t give a crap.

I'm not sure what exactly Favre is supposed to do. So far, the only things he has done are announce his retirement, and then say that talk of him coming back was just rumor. I don't see how that's attention-seeking. Quite the opposite, it seems that he was quite content being ignored until the media started gossip about his "comeback" so that they had something to write about over the offseason.

I get the annoyance at all the Favre stories, but why the annoyance at Favre? If reporters create stories about someone who's off enjoying their retirement, aren't the reporters the ones to blame?

how the hell was Favre the SI Sportsman of the Year for 2007?

Did we not see Favre throw away the NFC championship game with a pathetically underthrown interception?

Yes, we did, but that came after he won the award.

More importantly, looking at the list of winners, SI does not really make a effort to award the SotY to the best athlete in the world. Rather, it is more of a "this is a really good story of the year".

In this context, giving it to a beloved, but aging, QB who found the fountain of youth in what might be his last season and possibly leading his team to the Super Bowl makes perfect sense.

All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boy All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boy.All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boy. All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boy All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boy . All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boyAllFavreand no substance makes Pete a dullboy.All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boy All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boy.All Favre and no substance makes Pete a dull boy.

re4: If Favre gpes to Baltimore, the dbs would get a lot more interceptions.

Re: 19

It's fair to say the Favre isn't out there beating the drums demanding attention, but the guy isn't doing much to stop it either.

Since no one will go on the record about this, it's impossible to tell if there's any real substance here. But if Favre wanted to end the speculation he's smart enough to know how to do it. Saying it's 'just a rumor' (not a denial, not a confirmation)creates as many questions as it answers.

As an anti-Vikings person in the midwest, I'd love to see Favre in purple. That fanbase HATES Favre. One of two things would happen to Minnesota fans: They'd be absolutely furious or they'd waffle on their opinion of Favre. Either way, hilarity would ensue.

The conspiracy theorist in me wonders whether the Green Bay management foresaw this possible nightmare scenario on draft day and picked up Brohm with it in mind. (Then again, perhaps they drafted Brohm simply because they're not sold on Rodgers....)

By the way, I got an email from Amazon letting me know that my PFP 2008 was shipped today. Happy happy, joy joy!

re: 20
Not much of a defense there. Not really accurate, either.

Look at the list from 1998 to 2006
1998: McGwire, Sosa HR race
1999: US women's soccer (won world cup)
2000: Tiger Woods (won 3 majors)
2001: Curt Schilling and Randy Johnson (won World Series)
2002: Lance Armstrong (need I say why?)
2003: David Robinson and Tim Duncan (NBA Champions)
2004: Red Sox (World Series champions)
2005: Tom Brady (Super Bowl)
2006: Dwayne Wade (NBA champion)

In fact, if you go back through the list, aside from the 'athletes that care' year, there are only a few years that stand out as figures who weren't excelling in that year in particular, and most of them are coaches. And then there was Arthur Ashe, who was a bit of an exception due to his AIDS.

While Brady already had an award, they certainly could have given him another. I would have given the award to Roger Federer. This idea that Favre was 'sportsman of the year' was a complete shock because he was so manifestly undeserving that SI had to conjure up a false history of what the award had traditionally meant.

re: 19

the annoyance at Favre is because he did the exact same shtick two years ago, and last year, and every off season that I can think of. He's been "wondering" whether he should retire for years. And each offseason it becomes a story that the media dwell on.

And why am I blaming Favre now? He has issued a non-denial denial "that's a rumor", without denying the basic substance of the Mortensen story. He's got his brother and mother giving interviews about how he feels the Packers have forced him out of the door. So yeah, I see his hand behind the current kerfuffle. Chris Mortensen didn't invent this story on his own.

Favre retired because
a) the Packers didn't want him to start any more
and
b) he choked against the Giants

But now, a few months later, he wants back in. Fine. I hope that at some point all of the reverential coverage will take a hard look at how much his skills have deteriorated. His ego is way ahead of his talent level at this point.

I love reading the comments on this website, which is dedicated to it's unique statistical analysis of the game of football. Yet people here want the THIRD rated QB of 2007 (after the 2 best players in the sport) to retire or are worried about the repercussions involving Aaron Rodgers?

Not to get off-topic, or to disrespect Amazon.com, but my PFP2008 from Barnes and Noble ARRIVED today. Woo. Hoo.

#24 If he wins for them, a lot is forgotten and forgiven. See: Clemens and Damon playing in Yankee pinstripes.

In general, the media get the blame for this. Summer doldrums suck out everybody's brain cells, and they're taking advantage.

#26 That's what happens when PK picks the short straw in the office pool for "who gets to run this BS article this year?" Hey, it could have been worse: "Sportshorse of the Year: Barbaro."

FWIW, I like Favre to Balt. It improves competition in the AFC and skews the pre-written Pats/Colts/Chargers storylines. (Because, as we all know, cough cough, the winner of the AFC is the real Top NFL Team.)

It's probably a net-positive move for the NFL in general. Pitt is pretty formidable and the media seem to forget. Anyway, I'd like to see the Colts beat them in the playoffs again with another past-his-prime QB at the helm. Though Favre was very successful against Indy when he played them.

#28 Kevin, are you suggesting we start a sickening love-in sub-thread as part of the thread that must not be named--the "Manning and Brady (in whatever order) are the two best players in the NFL" thread. We can start with all the glowing praise they have heaped on each other over the years. Ick! Where's the fun in that?

I also love the fact that, with all our heady statistics and very smart readers, in the end, we're just football fans and make many arguments based on our passion and POV, not on the numbers. Plus, as I pointed out, it's the seasonal lull--we gotta argue somethin'.

re: 5

McCallister and Rolle are ancient? They are 31! Certainly they were injured last year, but I believe FO did a study demonstrating age had no impact on the likelihood of injury. Recovering from injuries is another story...

After all, the Pats had a pretty good LB corps that was well beyond ancient. Nowhere near as old as Lewis and Pryce.

The Ravens have always drafted good defenders and coached them well, it would be silly to think they can't field a top D with elite players like Ngata, Gregg, Suggs, Reed.

They were caught last year with their pants down when C-Mac and Rolle went down and the young DBs just weren't ready to play. It looks like they should be alright after getting Washington from OAK, having Ivy exclusively in the slot, and signing reliable vets as backups.

I guess having Favre would help the Ravens, because they showed in 2006 having a good offense really helps generating TOs on the defensive end. Part of me would rather have Troy Smith and Flacco battle it out for the starting spot. I don't think a gunslinging mentality really complements the Ravens though, just competency (Think Cam Cameron: Brees and Rivers).

kevinNYC,

You just won't let it go, will you? (click my name) ;)

Speaking of Midwestern heads asploding, what will BadgerT1000 do if Favre goes to Minnesota, and BT's most beloved player is suiting up for BT's most hated coach?

Also, based on Favre's last two cold-weather outdoors performances (in Chicago and the NFC Championship game), my guess he's either going to play indoors or much closer to the equator.

I'm just wondering how long it will take until the mouth-breathers on sport radio here in Philly start campaigning for Favre in midnight green. After all, Andy Reid was his QB coach before he came to Philly....

Jeebus save us.

McNabb to Min/Chi in exchange for a 2nd rounder, which PHI then sends to GB for Favre.

And everybody's happy.

Re #27
Not just Brohm, but also Matt Flynn in the 7th round. Picking both of those guys were "we really don't want you back" picks. That, or GB was invaded by the part of the brain of Jon Gruden that likes young QBs.

"We are early in what I can guarantee will be a very tumultuous month in the recurring Brett Favre will-he-or-won't-he saga"

Because every hack journalist in America will throw down their two cents in an opinion piece without going and asking the participants.

Because "Sources close to the Packer organisation/Favre Family" won't shut up.

Because any interview with a Packer will generate a quote which will have a partial sentance that has a tenous link to a possible Favre comeback.

"Favre stood up in front of the world six weeks after he played his last game and said he was finished."

Undeniable evidence that Favre has retired. No first hand evidence that Favre has changed his mind. I've found some second guessing and heresay, but thats just evidence that the story is media driven with no substance.

If people are really so sick of his story it wouldn't be all over ESPN today. I am pretty sure hey are on the ball when it comes to ratings research.

I know I for one avoid clicking on stories like this at the major new outlets like the plague.

Post 36:

It's Favre's life. Good luck to him no matter the path.

And I don't "hate" Brad Childress. Hate is a waste of energy. I recognize his flaws while others remain mesmorized by what he SAYS. The man is a con man. Scam artist. Flim-flammery. A three card monte dealer escaped to the northwoods. His day of reckoning will come.

Over the past several years Favre's performance would drop off as his legs tired. Packer fans saw it. The local writers saw it. His teammates knew it.

The arm is still there. The vision. He KNOWS what he needs to do. But at some point the body will simply fail to respond. As he rides his lawnmower in MS and his body becomes more accustomed to NOT getting hit the moment when his body will NOT be able to rally itself one....more...time will come. And right soon.

Favre is surrounded by folks who revel in his glory. Everyone but his wife is desperate for him to stay in the national limelight. Deanna knows better.

I am hopeful that the smart one in the family is able to keep the man to his current path.

Otherwise he will almost certainly embarrass himself as the dropoff will be sudden, dramatic and it will be ugly.

Also, based on Favre’s last two cold-weather outdoors performances (in Chicago and the NFC Championship game)

Umm, I'm pretty sure he played a cold-weather outdoor game in the divisional round, as snow fell on the field, and had the following stat line:

18-23 for 173 yards, 3 TDs, 0 INTs.

He played a great game, in cold-weather, outdoors, in the playoffs, leading his team back from a 14 point deficit, to win by 22 points.

And people think he was washed up? Because he had a bad game against a defense that held the greatest offense of the DVOA Era to 14 points? Because his team lost, in overtime, to the team that won the Super Bowl? Really? I don't get it.

Also, the idea that he "choked" against the Giants seems a bit odd to me. Sure, he did have a worse game in the playoffs against them than in the regular season, but then, so did Tony Romo and Tom Brady. Did they choke? And note that Green Bay scored more points against the Giants than anyone else who faced them in the playoffs.

If three different QBs all have bad games against the same defense in consecutive weeks, then what's the more likely explanation:

-That all three of them (who have a combined 4 Super Bowl Rings) just happened to choke in the span of a few weeks while playing against the same defense,

or

-That the defense in question was just really, really good?

The arm is still there. The vision. He KNOWS what he needs to do. But at some point the body will simply fail to respond. As he rides his lawnmower in MS and his body becomes more accustomed to NOT getting hit the moment when his body will NOT be able to rally itself one….more…time will come. And right soon.

I am hopeful that the smart one in the family is able to keep the man to his current path.

Otherwise he will almost certainly embarrass himself as the dropoff will be sudden, dramatic and it will be ugly.

Not that I disagree with you, but you did say pretty much the same thing last offseason, and he had a career year. Still, probably not a good idea for Favre to tempt fate again.

Why not Rodgers to Baltimore instead of Favre? Then the first round pick isnt totally wasted, and you dont have Favre playing for some other team as his career is ending. I hate seeing career guys finishing up their careers at some other team.

Favre could end all this talk easily by filing his retirement papers.

"Why not Rodgers to Baltimore instead of Favre?"

Because Baltimore just drafted Joe Flacco in the first round. Why would the Ravens want Rodgers, especially when you consider what the Packers would want in a trade for him? Baltimore might be interested in an experienced veteran who can play for a year or so until Flacco is ready. That describes Favre, not Rodgers.

Alex;

He did finish poorly. Biut this was offset by the team being much better.

The Seattle game was after a week's rest.

The cracks are showing. The arm and game savvy can act as spackle only so much longer.

He did finish poorly. Biut this was offset by the team being much better.

I know, but he did end up third in DPAR for the season, so overall he had a very good year.

The cracks are showing. The arm and game savvy can act as spackle only so much longer.

I agree, and that's why I'm glad he retired.

Favre played well against Seattle, no doubt. It helps when you have a back rushing for over 200 yards. The next week, when Grant could barley muster 20, Favre was horrible. Funny that.

RE: 51

Right, so what would a backfield of Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor do for his productivity?

I don't see that the situation is a total nightmare for Packer fans. Sure, it is not the way you would want to see it play out, but not a complete nightmare. If Favre plays for the Packers, some might be annoyed with him, but the majority would love to see him one more time, especially on a team with a chance to do well. If he goes and plays somewhere else, fans have two options: A) Take the high road and root for him to do well, thereby giving more credence to the idea that Packer fans are the best in the world (gag), or B) Play the bitter victim, directing your vemon toward either Favre or the front office, constantly reminding everyone of how this move tarnishes the great history of the greatest sports franchise ever (gag).

If Favre goes to Minn or Chic and does well for them, you get to hold it over the Viking and Bear fans that their team couldn't get over the hump without the great and powerful Favre. What could be better?

The real nightmare would be for Minnesota if (and personally I think this is impossible, but whatever) Favre played for them and they won a Super Bowl. How in the hell could you celebrate that? That is the nightmare.

#53

As a Bears fan I can assure you that if they were able to snag Favre and that allowed us to win a Superbowl I would be just fine with it. I would probably resurface from the deep, deep bender about two months later with a drink in my hand and no job left, but I would be fine with it.

BREAKING FAVRE NEWS!! ESPN is reporting that Favre sent a text message to Ted Thompson. Thompson wrote back saying he is on vacation.

...

#53

Agreed—with one caveat: Favre would not help the Vikings very much in 2008. But, seeing that man in purple and gold would make me use one of PK's vomit-inspired metaphors. ICK! Despite his DPAR ranking of #3 in 2007, the man is over-rated. He had at his disposal last year several things: a great defense, two excellent pass-blocking tackles, and a five-deep receiving corps with which he could spread the field and dink-n-dunk until the cows came home. He looked great for many of the same reasons that Tom Brady looked ungodly last year.

The Vikings do indeed have a fantastic D for 2008; they've got the best running-back duo in the league; two mediocre pass-blocking tackles (who are both great when blocking forward); and an improving receiving-corps. They also, believe it or not, believe in Tarvaris Jackson. They're not crazy. His DYAR last year was better than all of his 2006 classmates not named Jay Cutler. And he managed that while throwing to Troy Williamson and Robert Ferguson.

If the Packers don't want Favre because they'd rather develop their promising young quarterback, then why wouldn't the Vikings want the same?

56: I hear ya. The point of my post was 'if'. Note that I do not think it is even remotely possible that Favre would wear Purple this year. But 'if' he did and 'if' they won the Super Bowl, it would be a silver lining with a great big cloud attached to it in Minnesota.

We'll see about Jackson. I think you like him more than I do.

hey, who knows what goes on behing closed doors. But the biggest question that no one has commented on is which of the two quarterbacks will give the Packers the best chance of winning in 2008. Not in the future, but now. Most GMs and coaches are viewed as what have you done for me lately and not what will you do for me in the future.

If Favre has not been putting the work in to keep his body in shape for the past four or five months, I think it is likely his performance will disappoint; an aging player generally needs to work harder and more consistently in the off season than a young player does. I also think it would be a mistake for him to go to a team which did not run an offense similar to the Packers'. The guy has always depended on instinct, and the instinct will not be nearly as sound in a system in which he has less familiarity as to where people will be.

The idea of any qb starting up with a new set of receivers in mid to late July does not thrill me.

I hear talk about how Favre's contract would cause salary cap problems for the Packers if he were to return. Does anyone know if the Pack would have cap problems this year if #4 comes back?

To his everlasting credit Ted Thompson has no issue being the *sshole. And in this instance that is what is needed.

Because fans, local media and national media will all be looking for the "story".

And Ted Thompson doesn't give a rat f*ck about "stories". Ted Thompson has stated that his job is to make the Packers better. Period. If Ted Thompson thought Favre would help he would make himself available. Thompson, and McCarthy, both believe that Favre is thiiiiiiiiisssss close to driving off the career cliff.

Right now Ted is taking the Branch Rickey approach of dumping a player a year early versus a year late.

He's right. And sensible football fans like those here should praise him for the approach.

Because everywhere else the man is going to get ROASTED.

And I relish in the fact that the guy just DOES NOT CARE.

BRETT FAVRE TO NEW ENGLAND!!!?!?!

Yep. Here's how it's going to go down:
Bill Belichick (Or Pioli, I suppose) (BB): "Ted! I've got the solution to your problem. Trade us Brett!"

Ted Thompson (TT): "Ummm... you have Brady. Granted, he's no Peyton Manning, but neither is Brett."

BB: "Well... keep this between us, but Brady has a foot injury, and Peyton isn't available."

TT: "Oh! Well then, what'll you give me?"

BB: "How about a 4th?"

TT: "What? He's STILL Brett Favre. We're just tired of this year in year out drama, I just can't deal with this crap for another 4 years. We need a 1st."

BB: "We're prepared to give you a low second, and a lifetime supply of razors for that slob Aaron Rodgers."

TT: "Deal! I'll get the paper work faxed over to you."

Two days later...

BB: "Matt! Have I got a deal for you! Brett Favre!"

Matt Millen (MM): "I thought Brady was hurt?"

BB: "Damnit, that was supposed to be kept quiet. Well, the ingrown toenail miraculously healed. A gift from God, I tell you."

MM: "Oh, well, in that case, the best I can do is three firsts."

BB: (masking his dismay) "Did I hear you say three firsts?!?"

MM: "Yeah. I'm taking a beating from every direction over my draft choices. This should take care of that problem. I'll be a hero!"

BB: "Oh. Yeah. Good thinking, Matt! I'll get the papers faxed over to you ASAP."

After the announcement the next day:

TT: "F*ck!"
Lovie Smith: "Grossman!"
Brad Childress: "Zygi!"
BB: "Mwahahahahahahaahah."

Drat. I should've thought that through better. Obviously, it will be a Jake Plummer Style trade:

BB: "We'll give you a 4th for his rights, and a 1st if he gets off his rocker and plays for us."
TT: "Deal."

Three days later:
TT: "Well, at least we still get the 1st."
Mike Sherman: "Ummm, Ted... technically..."
Riiiiing.
BB: "Mwahahahahah!"

Really, I wouldn't be surprised at all if Favre has no intention of coming out of retirement, never did, and this whole kerfluffle was entirely a media creation.

Re: 64

I agree completely with the entire "Farve's coming back!" routine this summer being a media creation. As far as I can see, basically every other week some media guy goes to some random family member/ex-teammate/Packers official and asks "What do you think about Brett Favre coming back next year?" Then the question gets answered, and the next thing we hear is "Al Harris says that Favre's coming back!!!!!" or whatever the blather-of-the-week is. Thus far, there's been jack-all from Favre himself. When HE says, openly and on the record, that he is seeking to return, then there's a story. Until then, there's a bunch of football writers having nothing to talk about while no football is being played.

64/65: The reason most people assume Favre is behind this is because he's done the exact same thing the last two years. He used his buddies in the media to float stories about coming back, and uses his agent / family / friends to do the dirty work and apply pressure to an organization that, to my knowledge, has been pretty darn accommodating to him.

wow, lets not become revisionist in our hate of the Favre media circus.

Over the last few summers Favre's decision whether to retire or play on has been reported incessantly by the media. Favre has taken time to make the decision. The media then report daily that Favre has not made a decision.

Unfortunately the media don't know how to let go and instead of reporting factual NFL news (such as Favre's comment that he's retired and doesn't know how the rumours have started) we get to read their speculation on innuendo.

I am a Vikes fan. No head exploding here, far to funny if Favre leads us to the SB. Would be good for TJ to learn from him anyway. LOL, good luck with Vroom, GB.

Speaking as a hometown Carolina Panther fan and a longtime Brett Favre fan, we don't need him.

I believe Joe Flacco should sign his contract and get his butt into camp, now, because Baltimore's the best fit for Favre that I've heard of.

And now Chris Mortensen is reporting that sources in the Packer organization are saying that Favre has demanded to be released.

Wow. Mortensen really is putting a lot of effort into this 'media creation'!

I suggest people read the article at ESPN.com. Favre really sounds like he had no business retiring back in March. And that's why a lot of us are sick and tired of his act.

And while I'm at it: Elvis did a lot of drugs, and JFK slept around like a madman.

What's the problem? GB should just tell Brett that if he returns, they move him to NT.

This is the greatest off season of all time.

"Favre played very well last year and given all the talent around him in Green Bay, it is hard to see him crashing and burning in 2008."

Probably true. Which sets up the distinct possibility he'd waffle back and forth before deciding he really wanted to play in 2009, too. Where does it end? He plays well and that's proof he can still compete, so there's no need to retire. He has a bad year and then his motivation would be to come back and prove he can still do it.

Favre needs to call up Elway and get his insight. John walked away after a second straight Super Bowl win. And never once was there a rumor that he wanted to come back.

Let the posturing begin!

Green Bay is refusing to release Favre, saying that they would welcome him back as Rodgers' backup.

Hoo boy.

#44:

Don't forget, however, that the same Giants D was lit up several times during the regular season, including once by Brady and twice by Romo. While they undoubtedly improved, they didn't improve THAT much.

I think both Romo and Brady were more injured in their respective postseason games against the Giants than they were willing to admit.

In saying that, however, I'm not trying to take anything away from the Giants' playoff run, which was amazing. Injuries are part of the game.

Don’t forget, however, that the same Giants D was lit up several times during the regular season, including once by Brady and twice by Romo.

And once by Favre. So, again, if all three QBs went from lighting the Giants up to having bad games, doesn't that indicate that the difference was more in the Giants' Defense improving than in the QBs suddenly choking?

I think both Romo and Brady were more injured in their respective postseason games against the Giants than they were willing to admit.

Well, then how do you know Favre wasn't? He'd been injured during the season against the Cowboys, and the wear and tear of a long season can take a toll on any QB, especially an old one.

"Well, then how do you know Favre wasn’t? He’d been injured during the season against the Cowboys, and the wear and tear of a long season can take a toll on any QB, especially an old one."

I agree. That was actually the point I was trying to make, although perhaps I didn't state it clearly enough. I think the substandard performances of the QBs that the Giants faced in the playoffs had more to do with the physical condition that those QBs were in, and less to do with those QBs choking, or with some great metamorphosis by the Giants defense (although the latter certainly played some role).

Toughguy Ted Thompson vs. Bratty Brett Favre in the chess match of a lifetime, at least for the fragile cholesterol-choked cardiac systems of most Packer fans.

Here's my question: If I'm Ted Thompson, I say, "Welcome back, Brett. You've been traded to (insert lame AFC team here) for a 4th round pick."

To which Favre can either report and play (with less detriment to the Packers than would be brought by an outright release), or rereretire (what Thompson really wants).

BUT! What if the dreaded Bears or Vikings then call up the (insert lame AFC team here again), and say, "Hey--we'll give you a 2nd and a 4th for the rights to Favre."

What's to stop the (insert lame AFC team name here for hopefully the last time) from trading Favre to a team that the Packers would not appreciate?

And some others.

If the Packers believe Favre is interested in playing they should weigh their options:

1) Release him and get nothing, but have no ties. Worst choice, IMO.

2) Make a conditional trade. Tampa Bay gives a 4th-round pick and Sims for the option. If he plays, we give you a 1st round pick. Another 3rd if he plays in the playoffs or a 2nd if he plays in the Super Bowl.

3) Let him come back and backup Aaron Rodgers. Lots of QB get hurt. However, Favre would do very, very well just studying tape and taking 10% of the practice snaps (ideal for experienced backup as they can be capable, but see less wear on their body).

Green Bay needs an experienced backup. Will GB pay $12 million for that backup? Will Favre agree to ride the bench for most of the season? Probably not, but I think it is actually the smoothest transition. And Favre could be told that he need not feel bad as he would not be competing with Rodgers.

Why did Favre do so well in 2007? He finally tried to let his team win the games rather than forcing so many interceptions and bad throws. Before then he relied heavily on his (phenomenal) physical skills and put the team on his shoulders even when it was not the best game plan. Like Michael Jordan at the end, Favre has become a much better team player even as his physical abilities come down to "just" above average.

There are a lot of teams that could use an experienced QB. If Minnesota could make the trade they really do seem in the best position to make the most marked improvement. Maybe Tavaris can not lose games for them (he is not good enough to win lots of his games with his arms, eyes, and brains). However, Favre is good enough to help let his team win... although the Vikings receiving corps is nothing to brag about (and they might be missing their best OL). Another interesting place to land would be Jacksonville, although I guess they really are happy with their QB?

Pete--

Favre is more likely to get an outright release than be offered (or to accept) $12 million to ride the pine--although it would be entertaining to nonPacker fans and Favre to let the cameras pan to him on the bench everytime A-God had an interception/fumble/incompletion/injury.

As to the high-quality receivers the Packers have, keep in mind that Favre made several unheralded draft picks, trades, and free agents into feared receivers over the years. We'll see if A-God can do the same.

I don't much but there is no way in H*LL that Ted Thompson trades Favre to a divisional rival. Thompson is a MILLION TIMES more likely to walk nude down Lombardi Avenue than he is to do ANYTHING to help the Vikings, Lions or Bears.

That is crazy talk.......

@81: I've found you to be a sane, well-reasoned poster on this board in the past (with an inexplicable abhorrance of Brad Childress).

But by saying that TT will do anything possible to keep Favre from Chinnesotatroit, you're sounding like those packer fans who a week ago were denying that Favre would ever want to play for any team other than Green Bay.

If Favre is "thiiiiiiiissss close" to falling off the skills cliff, why would Thompson be so worried about sending him to a division rival, especially one coached by someone as incapable as Childress? Do you really think it will be less damaging to the Packers to have Favre on the sidelines while A-God goes through the normal bumps and bruises experienced by a developing quarterback? Favre holding a clipboard and running the scout team, waiting for the inevitable season-ending injury to A-God? What will the fans do if A-God starts all 16 games, has a decent-but-not-great season, and the Pack goes 8-8? They'll be arguing even more than they are now, only the subject of disagreement will be if they should string up Rodgers or Thompson first.

If Thompson is as tough as he appears to be, he'll release Favre and let the chips fall where they may. They obviously believe strongly enough in Rodgers to have made it to this point.

Oh--

and some others.

BOO:

I dislike repeating myself but understand that not every post is read in every thread. I have discussed Favre's current traits elsewhere which should answer your question(s).

Regarding the Vikes and Lions the key element is playing inside. Favre really enjoys playing indoors these days and has had some of his best games in that setting. Certainly a portion of this is dependent on the opposition (who doesn't slap around the Lions?) but it is also true Favre, the coaches and the entire organization has talked about it. Whatever the path of Favre's decline the downward slope will be arrested by playing a guaranteed 8 games a year inside. Ted Thompson has specifically pointed to former Packer Darren Sharper as a guy who added years to his productivity by moving to a team that plays indoors. And regarding bad weather conditions Favre used to revel in those situations. His physical attributes (very large hands, great arm, strength) combined with his legendary toughness made Favre a fantastic qb in cold, wet and snow in any combination.

Now? He's a wuss.

The last few years when the conditions are adverse Favre has routinely gacked. Worse yet, he visibly appears to NOT WANT TO PLAY. The Packer coaches and beat writers were stunned by Favre huddling on the sideline during the Chicago game late last year. And then mortified that he publicly admitted afterward that the conditions affected him. McCarthy and Thompson are both believers in "toughness".

The Seattle playoff game? Favre had two weeks off, was playing a mediocre team and had been challenged by his boss to quit being a candy#ss.

And even if a dome doesn't provide a boost Thompson knows that early on Favre would be a HUGE step up for any divisional opponent at the qb position. And GB plays MN the first game of the season.

Finally, the Packers are a young team. I believe Mike and Ted think they can handle a Favre as backup scenario because the majority of players want Rodgers to get his shot.

I hope this helps.

BT1K:

I respect your knowledge, and opinion. I just think the Packers best chance of winning now is to take Favre back, A-God be damnned. If they firmly believe that Rodgers is better than Favre right now, then get rid of Favre as soon as possible by any means, and move on.

Regardless of the outcome, it should easily be the most interesting season in Packers' history. In the meantime, this is going to be a damn long eight weeks.

The team is thinking long-term. There will NEVER be a better situation to make the transition to an untested qb. Solid offensive-line, deep/talented receiving corps, semblance of a running game and a coach with a clue.

Keeping Favre the team KNOWS that even home field advantage in the playoffs is more of a hindrance than a help. He just can't hack it in the weather that SHOULD give GB a big edge.

Work the whole season to KNOW that it will be for naught?

Better to go another route.

I think Thompson/McCarthy should be commended for taking the harder path.