
There's so many bits and pieces coming out on the whole Brett Favre story that's it's almost hard to keep track of.
To me, it feels like just a big chess match. Except that all anyone is doing is experimenting with their pawns. No one's brought out their big pieces yet.
In the whole Greta Van Susteren interview, one thing (or a couple of things depending on how you look at it) caught my eye.
Favre is quoted as saying, "And, you know, Ted and I, I thought, have always had a good relationship. We don't talk a whole lot, we don't go out and eat and shoot the bull. But on three different occasions -- I don't want to say lied, I think that's kind of a harsh word, but I think untruth or whatever is better."
Those three occasions Favre spoke about have been discussed ad nauseum. The first was the Packers failure to trade for Randy Moss after Favre supposedly offered to restructure his contract to help get Moss to Green Bay. The second was the failure to re-sign offensive linemen Mike Whale and Marco Rivera. And the third was asking Thompson to interview Steve Mariucci for the then vacant coaching position.
As far as Moss and the offensive linemen, I'm not really sure what Favre is referring to as "untruths." He never really goes onto explain what Thompson told him regarding those situations. Did Thompson tell Favre the Packers were going to do one thing regarding those players and then do another? It's not really clear.
But more troubling is, since when did Favre want to become general manager of the Green Bay Packers? I'm sure he has an opinion, but shouldn't he worry about quarterbacking the Packers and not worry about personnel moves?
Personally, the only thing I fault Thompson for is not re-signing guard Mike Whale. And there are people who likely disagree with me considering Whale's injury history. It's my own personal opinion that Whale was at the height of his career and was one of the most dominating offensive linemen in the NFL when he left the Packers even if Pro Bowl and All-Pro honors didn't indicate it (On a side note, I believe things like Pro Bowl nods come years after players deserve them as if it is a thank you for years of service. Certainly not all cases are like that, but many are, especially offensive linemen). The offense line in Green Bay certainly regressed once he left, and I think almost anyone can agree with that.
I'm glad that Thompson didn't resign Rivera who's career and health only went downhill since leaving the Packers. And I'm even more glad he didn't trade for Randy Moss. Sure Moss went on to have a dominating year in New England. But with the depth the Packers have at receiver, who needs Randy Moss? They got to the Final Four of NFL teams without him, and who's to say the Packers wouldn't have beaten the Patriots in the Super Bowl had they made it? And once again, there's plenty of people who disagree with that viewpoint, but those are my feelings on the situation.
As far as Steve Mariucci goes, the following are Favre's comments as he told Greta Van Susteren:
And once again, it's hard to blame Thompson for doing anything wrong. As far as Favre knows, maybe Thompson had already entered negotiations with McCarthy to join the Green Bay Packers, but didn't have anything finalized. And it's also hard to argue with the results. Coming off the worst season in Packers history since 1991, McCarthy led the Packers to an 8-8 and within an opponent loss of the playoffs in '06 and to the NFC Championship game in '07. I love Steve Mariucci too (on a side note, I personally know Mariucci's uncle very well, but that's irrelevant). You just can't argue with Thompson's decision on coaching personnel given the results.
I'm still torn on the issue. It's hard to not want Favre quarterbacking the Packers given his performance last season. I really think what it's going to come down to is Favre is going to have to force the Packers' hand by reporting to camp. Only then will the wheels start turning. Maybe the the Packers will trade Favre, maybe they'll even trade Rodgers, but nothing's going to happen until Favre reports. I can't forsee the Packers releasing Favre. And either Favre's or Rodger's trade value is going to be at its highest once Favre commits to playing.
To me, it feels like just a big chess match. Except that all anyone is doing is experimenting with their pawns. No one's brought out their big pieces yet.
In the whole Greta Van Susteren interview, one thing (or a couple of things depending on how you look at it) caught my eye.
Favre is quoted as saying, "And, you know, Ted and I, I thought, have always had a good relationship. We don't talk a whole lot, we don't go out and eat and shoot the bull. But on three different occasions -- I don't want to say lied, I think that's kind of a harsh word, but I think untruth or whatever is better."
Those three occasions Favre spoke about have been discussed ad nauseum. The first was the Packers failure to trade for Randy Moss after Favre supposedly offered to restructure his contract to help get Moss to Green Bay. The second was the failure to re-sign offensive linemen Mike Whale and Marco Rivera. And the third was asking Thompson to interview Steve Mariucci for the then vacant coaching position.
As far as Moss and the offensive linemen, I'm not really sure what Favre is referring to as "untruths." He never really goes onto explain what Thompson told him regarding those situations. Did Thompson tell Favre the Packers were going to do one thing regarding those players and then do another? It's not really clear.
But more troubling is, since when did Favre want to become general manager of the Green Bay Packers? I'm sure he has an opinion, but shouldn't he worry about quarterbacking the Packers and not worry about personnel moves?
Personally, the only thing I fault Thompson for is not re-signing guard Mike Whale. And there are people who likely disagree with me considering Whale's injury history. It's my own personal opinion that Whale was at the height of his career and was one of the most dominating offensive linemen in the NFL when he left the Packers even if Pro Bowl and All-Pro honors didn't indicate it (On a side note, I believe things like Pro Bowl nods come years after players deserve them as if it is a thank you for years of service. Certainly not all cases are like that, but many are, especially offensive linemen). The offense line in Green Bay certainly regressed once he left, and I think almost anyone can agree with that.
I'm glad that Thompson didn't resign Rivera who's career and health only went downhill since leaving the Packers. And I'm even more glad he didn't trade for Randy Moss. Sure Moss went on to have a dominating year in New England. But with the depth the Packers have at receiver, who needs Randy Moss? They got to the Final Four of NFL teams without him, and who's to say the Packers wouldn't have beaten the Patriots in the Super Bowl had they made it? And once again, there's plenty of people who disagree with that viewpoint, but those are my feelings on the situation.
As far as Steve Mariucci goes, the following are Favre's comments as he told Greta Van Susteren:
"So, the next year Mike Sherman is let go, and - I said, 'Ted, will you do me a favor and -- Steve Mariucci had been released probably four weeks previous with a few games left in the season. A close friend of mine, everyone knows that. And he and I talked occasionally and I said, 'Hey, how is it?' He said, 'I have to admit, I get time to spend with my kids, I've got four kids, and I miss it, but' - a lot of small talk.
"And so when our season is over and we don't have a coach, I said, 'Ted, will you do me a favor, would you interview Steve Mariucci?' Not would you sign him, or I'm not coming back, or anything else. I said, 'Would you interview him? And his exact words to me were, 'Well, from what I understand he doesn't want to coach again right now.' And I said, 'That's true, but I talked to him two days ago, a day ago, whatever.' And I said, 'Would you be interested in coaching Green Bay?' He's from Iron Mountain, Michigan, hour and a half north. And he said, 'That's always been a dream, sure I would.'
"So I tell Ted that. And he says, 'OK.' So I go home and I'm down here and the next thing I know Mike McCarthy is hired as head coach, which - so what? He may do a fine job. Whatever, no problem. I thought, that's a little odd. So I called Steve. I said, 'How did the interview go?' 'What interview?' He said there was no interview. I said, 'Did Ted talk to you? He said, 'Yes.' He said a couple of days after McCarthy was hired he called me and just wanted to know if everything was OK, how are you doing, and all that stuff. And I thought, OK.'"
And once again, it's hard to blame Thompson for doing anything wrong. As far as Favre knows, maybe Thompson had already entered negotiations with McCarthy to join the Green Bay Packers, but didn't have anything finalized. And it's also hard to argue with the results. Coming off the worst season in Packers history since 1991, McCarthy led the Packers to an 8-8 and within an opponent loss of the playoffs in '06 and to the NFC Championship game in '07. I love Steve Mariucci too (on a side note, I personally know Mariucci's uncle very well, but that's irrelevant). You just can't argue with Thompson's decision on coaching personnel given the results.
I'm still torn on the issue. It's hard to not want Favre quarterbacking the Packers given his performance last season. I really think what it's going to come down to is Favre is going to have to force the Packers' hand by reporting to camp. Only then will the wheels start turning. Maybe the the Packers will trade Favre, maybe they'll even trade Rodgers, but nothing's going to happen until Favre reports. I can't forsee the Packers releasing Favre. And either Favre's or Rodger's trade value is going to be at its highest once Favre commits to playing.


7 comments:
Brian,
Good article and I enjoy reading the Railbird Central web site. Not to totally defend Farve, but what QB wouldn't want to have Moss to throw the ball to? Also, I think it's more than just quarterbacking, it's winning. I don't blame a player for lobbying to get a player that they believe would be a real asset to the team. Of course, a player's definition of "asset" might be quite different than a coache's or GM's definition.
I don't know if this makes sense but it's just a different way of looknig at things.
However, I do support TT on this issue.
Finally, as a conspiracy buff (I lvoe the X-files), I think the Vikings believe they are a QB short of going to the Superbowl - a top run offense, a top run defense, and now possibly a top pass defense. So this tampering doesn't surpise me one bit.
I still fail to see how Moss would have made us better last year. We were 13-3 and he wouldn't have made a difference in the NFC Championship game. All having Moss would have done is delayed the development of both Greg Jennings and James Jones
Having thought a lot about this Farve situation I wonder if Brett ever had the chance to totally mature emotionally outside of the game of football before he retired...was he was really believing the press hype that only he is responsible for winning the game...and that the pressure of Green Bay's great legacy was all on him last year?
That is a big burden to carry, it would break most men after a long extended season. But Farve is a truly unique athlete, a truly unique competitor and if he is ready to have another go at it I say get behind Brett and let him roll!
I also believe Ted Thompson carries no blame here...so far. He and Mike McCarthy have been placed in some very difficult positions with the retire or not saga. Thompson is proving himself to be excellent at identifying the “big team picture” and filling those holes needed to complete that big picture. But he must also (and I am sure does) realize that in football things can change quickly, and he has to adjust quickly to those changes...for the good of the team.
I really like what this guy from Chicago has to say about the situation...take a look...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/cs-14-morrisseyjul14,0,371446.column
Go Packers! Go Farve! Go Ted Thompson...show us your leadership and "right this ship"!
Brian - the three occasions Favre was referring"if you listened to the interview " was HE SAID that Ted Thomson knew favre said he offered to help finacially on Moss's deal!!!!!!!! -TT said he didnt know anything about that!and he did -similar stories on the other 2 occations-- to help only !! if those might be the direction TT might decide!! not a fracking general mgr. but as the field general of 17 years that just might have a vested interest the team!!!! YA THINK , DUH !!!!
hardly the first time a star qb wanted to play gm. i can't blame favre for wanting moss. can't see how the most talented wr in football history wouldn't benefit a team.
RK
The most talented wide receiver didn't benefit the Vikings much.
vikes made the nfc championship twice with moss--that's with cunningham and culpepper at qb. vikes went to playoffs most every season, beat green bay in green bay another year, with moss. since moss left they haven't sniffed the playoffs. look at the effect moss had on qb's stats, on point production. thompson does things his own way, and that's fine, but it's hard to really say that the packers were better off without moss last year. i will never understand why the packers passed on moss twice. he is exactly the sort of player a gunslinger like favre would have truly benefited from. again, thompson is the gm, he's built a good team.
rk
Post a Comment