If he wants to play, the Pack MUST bring him back and make him the starter again, shelving Rodgers for another year. We have a SB-caliber team and if one of the biggest stars in NFL history wants to be our QB, I say he's earned the right to reverse himself and be welcomed back with open arms.
Any BS about "needing to move on" will haunt the Packers for decades if Favre calls their bluff and ends us somewhere else.
For $12.5M, one more year is cheap.
You mark my word: the Packers do ANYTHING ELSE and they will never live it down.
| Permalink |
Comments (6)
The fact is the Packers can sit on Favre for 3 more years and do nothing because there are three more years remaining on his contract, and there is nothing, zilch, nada that Favre can do about it.
The fact is that Favre doesn't want to return to the Packers, for whatever reason, icluding the supposed reason he doesn't want to take the back-up QB Rodgers position. Favre is nice, but let's face facts, the Green Bay head office has been seriously screwed up for some time, a very possible reason why Favre wants to go elsewhere.
Posted by Mick | July 12, 2008 12:28 AM
Do the Packer's stockholders feel the same way about the head office? If so, why haven't they been sent packing (as it were)?
Posted by Michael
|
July 12, 2008 8:12 PM
Packers are a non-profit corp, not IBM. Not that IBM gets turned around by protesting stockholders either. Not that everyone thinks Brett's post retirement return is a good idea. Check www.timesfour.com for a solid look at serious discussion.
Packers will welcome him back, but not as #1 QB. Just not happening. Sad, but it what happened with Montana and Unitas and what almost happened with Marino. They will also not give him his unconditional release. If someone else really wants to rent Brett for one year, let them talk to us.
You get to take all the time you want to decide about retiring, but you don't get to un-retire after the team gets rebuilt. Plus $12 million means that many other players don't get re-signed (e.g. Grant) and screws up the team's future. Remember, even Reggie White (and Jim Taylor) played elsewhere after leaving the Packers. Brett won't be the last HOFer to end up elsewhere after an long career with one team.
Posted by hof1991
|
July 13, 2008 6:00 PM
I agree with you wholeheartedly. If Favre wants to play, you have to bring him pack. It comes down to this simple question, is the team better with Favre or with Rodgers starting?
I am curious though, just exactly how did the team get "rebuilt" after only a few months?...by drafting 2 QBs in the draft?
Posted by Stilt | July 14, 2008 11:01 AM
We all love Favre, but come on. Rodgers would be a starter on other teams already. He's a good QB, or can be, and won't mature unless he plays. How many years does Rodgers have to waste of his career to let Favre have one more minute in the sun?
Favre needs to hang it up before he gets seriously hurt. Listen to Aikman. It isn't the arm that goes. It's the ability to handle so many of the hits. I don't want to see Favre die on the field or have a Theisman moment. His time is over and he needs to get over it already.
The Packers would be smart to trade him if he keeps this up.
Posted by ry | July 14, 2008 11:33 AM
I am furious about that ted Thompson getting Brett Favre to leave anyway & now Woodson makes these accusations about Brett giving Detroit tips about the Packers.
Who does he think he is.
That whole management in Greenbay is screwed up. Ted Thompson should have been kicked out. Of Course the rest have to go along with him or get fired.
Why is so much trouble caused for Brett anyway? He's the one who got screwed the whole way.
Posted by Virgie | October 20, 2008 10:43 AM