Favre reinstated! (1 Viewer)

Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

yourbeliefs

Something Profound
Pub Member / Supporter
Sep 20, 2007
13,170
274
Northeast
My point exactly. With Favre, GB at least knows what they have. Rogers is a complete mystery. Why not save the experiment for when they're not competing for a Super Bowl.
And what exactly do they have? A 39 year old quarterback who's past his prime, behind in speed, and more interception prone than ever? If the Packers are going to look towards the future, looking to Bret is NOT a wise option. It's time for the Packers to move on.
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

HD MM

SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
And what exactly do they have? A 39 year old quarterback who's past his prime, behind in speed, and more interception prone than ever? If the Packers are going to look towards the future, looking to Bret is NOT a wise option. It's time for the Packers to move on.

Again, that 39 year-old QB who is "past his prime" took his team to the NFC Championship just last year! There is no guarantees than Rodgers could equal that success. I could understand if this team was in a rebuilding phase, but they're not. No worries though, with all this drama surrounding Favre, I think it's best for them both to part ways. I do blame the Packers more so than I do Favre himself for this mess though.
 

salsadancer7

SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
And what exactly do they have? A 39 year old quarterback who's past his prime, behind in speed, and more interception prone than ever? If the Packers are going to look towards the future, looking to Bret is NOT a wise option. It's time for the Packers to move on.

What is your favorite team in the NFL and who is the QB?
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

db2

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 1, 2006
1,585
0
MN
A 39 year old quarterback who's past his prime, behind in speed, and more interception prone than ever? If the Packers are going to look towards the future, looking to Bret is NOT a wise option. It's time for the Packers to move on.

If that is what the Packers believe then why are they afraid to trade him to an opponent?
 

HD MM

SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
If that is what the Packers believe then why are they afraid to trade him to an opponent?

IMO, the Packers should've:

a) Let the two compete for a starting spot.

b) If Favre lost the spot to Rodgers, trade him.

c) If Rodgers lost out to Favre, wait until next year or when Favre finally retires to start the Rodgers experiment. You do after all have Favre signed for 2 more years! Weren't you counting on him playing those years out when you signed him?

This would ensure the Packers would end up with the better QB. If they had to trade Favre to an NFC divisional opponent, at least they could feel safe in selecting the better QB after allowing both QB's to compete for the respective starting spot.
 

HD MM

SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
They would also like to not send it to a team where Bret is likely to do a lot of damage against them, such as their division opponents.

But that is our point.

Why would they be "scared" if they truly believe they have the better QB in Rodgers? Wouldn't the team with the better QB prevail in those matchups?
 

Ramy

The Star Wars Collector Podcast
Supporting Founder
Jan 27, 2004
30,897
512
Here
And yet you don't thin Brett does not deserve to change his mind?? He has done MORE for the Packers than ANY other player in the last 20 or 30 years! He changed his mind....like if NO ONE ELSE has ever done that.....:rolleyes:

Women do it all the time. ;):D
 

db2

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 1, 2006
1,585
0
MN
You do after all have Favre signed for 2 more years! Weren't you counting on him playing those years out when you signed him?

Futhermore, if you do not wish to fulfill the remainder of that contract then release him!! It happens all the time in the NFL, it's common practice. If a player is a "bust" or does not live up to his salary then he is cut.

I'll say it again, if the Packers do not wish to pay his salary this year then release him or trade him.
 

HD MM

SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
I think the longer the Packers don't do anything, the more they're going to end up looking like the bad guy when this mess is said and done.

The ball is in the Packers court now.
 

yourbeliefs

Something Profound
Pub Member / Supporter
Sep 20, 2007
13,170
274
Northeast
But that is our point.

Why would they be "scared" if they truly believe they have the better QB in Rodgers? Wouldn't the team with the better QB prevail in those matchups?
The Packers are not going with Rodgers because they think he is "better." They are going with Rodgers so that they can start work on the "Post-Favre" era. They've had this guy waiting on the sidelines for like 3 years, paying him to basically take notes and hand people Gatorade. They didn't draft Rodgers because they liked his hairstyle: They did it to have someone for the future, and quite frankly, why NOT start building towards the future now? The Packers are not likely to get much further than they did last year with Favre, and the only place that is "up" is the Super Bowl. That is a tall order for ANY team, and I don't think this Packer team, with or without Favre, is up to that task.
 

iceturkee

DINFOS Trained Killer
Supporting Founder
Sep 13, 2005
7,391
144
daytona beach
the packers, like any other reasonable team, were/are trying to prepare for life without brett. too many professional teams stick with their hero too long (miami dolphins come to mind) and then have a hell of a time trying to rebuild. the packers are trying to prepare for their future.

beside, lets get to the crux of the matter. how many of you have employers who would give you your old job back if you told them you were retiring and then changed your mind 5 months later? they would have already hired your replacement.

brett certainly has a right to unretire. but green bay (as the employer) has a right to move on without him!
 

iceturkee

DINFOS Trained Killer
Supporting Founder
Sep 13, 2005
7,391
144
daytona beach
Again, that 39 year-old QB who is "past his prime" took his team to the NFC Championship just last year! There is no guarantees than Rodgers could equal that success. I could understand if this team was in a rebuilding phase, but they're not. No worries though, with all this drama surrounding Favre, I think it's best for them both to part ways. I do blame the Packers more so than I do Favre himself for this mess though.


and there's no guarantee the 39-year-old qb has another super season left either. how many people said the niners and patriots would sink to the bottom without montanna and drew bledsoe? along comes steve young and tom brady. i think they both have won super bowls too!!
 

db2

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 1, 2006
1,585
0
MN
how many of you have employers who would give you your old job back if you told them you were retiring and then changed your mind 5 months later?

Most of us have jobs that are not bound by a signed contract, that's the difference.

I agree, Green Bay does have a right to move on but they must do it within the rules of the NFL.
 

yourbeliefs

Something Profound
Pub Member / Supporter
Sep 20, 2007
13,170
274
Northeast
the packers, like any other reasonable team, were/are trying to prepare for life without brett. too many professional teams stick with their hero too long (miami dolphins come to mind) and then have a hell of a time trying to rebuild. the packers are trying to prepare for their future.

beside, lets get to the crux of the matter. how many of you have employers who would give you your old job back if you told them you were retiring and then changed your mind 5 months later? they would have already hired your replacement.

brett certainly has a right to unretire. but green bay (as the employer) has a right to move on without him!
Yeah people really seem to forget that main point about this. This is not a 24 and a 29 year old fighting over a job, but a 24 and 39 year old. You have 1 player that has 1 year, maybe 2 left in his career, versus one who has yet to even truly embark on it. Favre may be a great player, but he's not a God, and his prime is well behind him. Bret is eventually going to leave, and the team will have to adjust. This will take some time, and the longer Bret plays, the more this process is going to be delayed.
 

db2

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 1, 2006
1,585
0
MN
This just in:

Fox Sports' Jay Glazier is reporting that Brett Favre's career in Green Bay is over. Apparently both sides left this morning's meeting agreeing that a trade is in order.

link
 

SabresRule

SatelliteGuys Master
Apr 15, 2008
12,883
5
Wisconsin
This story is now beyond Spygate in terms of repetitiveness and annoyingness.

Favre is becoming the most annoying athlete in sports, IMO.

MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND!!
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top