Atom Feed (xml)
The whole Brett Favre situation is really, really frustrating. There's no other way to put it. No one knows how it's going to play out. And until it finally does, be prepared for more and more frustration.
Maybe the most irritating part about it all is the inconsistent comments coming from Brett Favre and his family.
In what might be the text message heard 'round the world, Favre texted three simple words to friend and Biloxi Sun Herald sports reporter Al Jones: "It's all rumor."
I personally wonder if Favre actually bothered to put that apostrophe in a text message, but that's a story for another day.
If there's one group of people that really, really, really are looking out for the best interests of Favre, it's his family. One would think they'd convey a unified message, something that really expressed Favre's true feelings whatever they are.
But instead we're receiving mixed message. Favre says, "It's all rumor." But then Favre's brother Scott came out and told WTMJ-TV in Milwaukee, "I think it's 50-50. There's no doubt he can play. He's in good shape, he's working out, we know he can still play, he's healthy, so, if he did, it wouldn't surprise me."
And then Favre's mother, Bonita, came out and told WITI-TV the following: "He's felt like that for the last couple of years, that the Packers didn't really want him back. But nothing's been said. You know it's just been bits and pieces throughout the last couple of years, things that would come up, and it just didn't seem like they went out of their way to keep him. It was kind of like, 'You're done.' "
With messages like that, they're the ones that are going out and creating the media firestorm. Is that what they really want? Is that in Favre's best interest?
Then to add to all the mind boggling experiences, Rob Demovsky of the Green Bay Press-Gazette writes, "Thompson visited Favre at his Hattiesburg, Miss., home in May and, according to sources, Favre would have un-retired at that point had Thompson asked him to come back. But Thompson never broached the subject with him."
Why is it Thompsons job to ask Favre to unretire? It's not. (And that's not to suggest that Demovsky thinks so) Is it just me, or is the ball pretty much in Favre's court? If he wants to play, fine. It's his call. If he un-retires, then the Packers will have to deal with it, no matter how unfortunate a situation they might be forced to deal with.
Now add in the Aaron Rodgers aspect, and it's enough to make a person go bonkers.
Should Favre come back, it will boil down to two things. He'll play for the Packers, or they'll trade him.
If he's traded, "Thompson would have to accept that he will forever be known as the GM who let an icon leave Green Bay," writes Lori Nickel of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
"Fans would never forgive General Manager Ted Thompson for trading Favre," writes the Press-Gazette's Mike Vandermause.
And that brings up another unfortunate situation for Thompson. He can't win. He'll either be ostracized for trading Favre or, if he didn't trade him, for stunting Aaron Rodgers' growth.
And there will be no majority. Fans will hear both sides of the story. Print articles, television stories, talk radio and Internet debate will rage with absolute vigor no matter what direction the Packers decide to take.
Vandermause writes in his article that if Favre comes back, that they should open up the competition between him and Rodgers. But it's not that simple. What if Rodgers wins? And at Favre's age, I believe he very possibly could (and, of course, I'm sure many people would debate that point as well). What would the Packers do then? Would they waste an entire preseason playing out a battle between Favre and Rodgers while letting Brian Brohm get just a fraction of the snaps? And what about Matt Flynn too?
Another option would be to trade Rodgers, which would put the future of the Packers squarely on the shoulders of Brohm. Are the Packers ready to do that yet? I'm not sure.
I'm not sure about anything right now. All I know is that it's all very frustrating.
Maybe the most irritating part about it all is the inconsistent comments coming from Brett Favre and his family.
In what might be the text message heard 'round the world, Favre texted three simple words to friend and Biloxi Sun Herald sports reporter Al Jones: "It's all rumor."
I personally wonder if Favre actually bothered to put that apostrophe in a text message, but that's a story for another day.
If there's one group of people that really, really, really are looking out for the best interests of Favre, it's his family. One would think they'd convey a unified message, something that really expressed Favre's true feelings whatever they are.
But instead we're receiving mixed message. Favre says, "It's all rumor." But then Favre's brother Scott came out and told WTMJ-TV in Milwaukee, "I think it's 50-50. There's no doubt he can play. He's in good shape, he's working out, we know he can still play, he's healthy, so, if he did, it wouldn't surprise me."
And then Favre's mother, Bonita, came out and told WITI-TV the following: "He's felt like that for the last couple of years, that the Packers didn't really want him back. But nothing's been said. You know it's just been bits and pieces throughout the last couple of years, things that would come up, and it just didn't seem like they went out of their way to keep him. It was kind of like, 'You're done.' "
With messages like that, they're the ones that are going out and creating the media firestorm. Is that what they really want? Is that in Favre's best interest?
Then to add to all the mind boggling experiences, Rob Demovsky of the Green Bay Press-Gazette writes, "Thompson visited Favre at his Hattiesburg, Miss., home in May and, according to sources, Favre would have un-retired at that point had Thompson asked him to come back. But Thompson never broached the subject with him."
Why is it Thompsons job to ask Favre to unretire? It's not. (And that's not to suggest that Demovsky thinks so) Is it just me, or is the ball pretty much in Favre's court? If he wants to play, fine. It's his call. If he un-retires, then the Packers will have to deal with it, no matter how unfortunate a situation they might be forced to deal with.
Now add in the Aaron Rodgers aspect, and it's enough to make a person go bonkers.
Should Favre come back, it will boil down to two things. He'll play for the Packers, or they'll trade him.
If he's traded, "Thompson would have to accept that he will forever be known as the GM who let an icon leave Green Bay," writes Lori Nickel of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
"Fans would never forgive General Manager Ted Thompson for trading Favre," writes the Press-Gazette's Mike Vandermause.
And that brings up another unfortunate situation for Thompson. He can't win. He'll either be ostracized for trading Favre or, if he didn't trade him, for stunting Aaron Rodgers' growth.
And there will be no majority. Fans will hear both sides of the story. Print articles, television stories, talk radio and Internet debate will rage with absolute vigor no matter what direction the Packers decide to take.
Vandermause writes in his article that if Favre comes back, that they should open up the competition between him and Rodgers. But it's not that simple. What if Rodgers wins? And at Favre's age, I believe he very possibly could (and, of course, I'm sure many people would debate that point as well). What would the Packers do then? Would they waste an entire preseason playing out a battle between Favre and Rodgers while letting Brian Brohm get just a fraction of the snaps? And what about Matt Flynn too?
Another option would be to trade Rodgers, which would put the future of the Packers squarely on the shoulders of Brohm. Are the Packers ready to do that yet? I'm not sure.
I'm not sure about anything right now. All I know is that it's all very frustrating.
5 comments:
"Fans would never forgive General Manager Ted Thompson for trading Favre," writes the Press-Gazette's Mike Vandermause.
Mike V. is a buffoon. IMO, Favre is barely a playoff caliber QB. It's time for the next guy to show whether or not he is the guy to lead the Packers. Let's stop looking to the past and concentrate on the future.
I am getting really frustrated at all these Brett Favre stories as well. It seems like every week we hear another story about how Brett is going to come back. Has any of them been correct yet? No. Will this one actually come true? At this point no one knows. I wish the media would just drop the story though. Everyone of these stories provide a distration for the team and they can't be helping Aaron Rodger's confidence heading into the season.
As far as if the rumors do come true (which I really hope they don't) the Packers are really in a bind. I really don't want to see Brett play for another team but I think if we keep him we will be forced to trade Rodgers since he will probably finally be sick and tired of the Brett Favre saga. This will stunt the Packers future growth. Plus I don't think Favre will help the team any more than Rodgers since at this point I think they are about equal as far as their play goes.
I think the rumors will end up not coming true due to the fact that Brett made the choice to retire by himself. Obviously there is some reason why he retired in the first place. I think Brett is just missing the game and he will soon remember why he left the game in the first place and decide that retirement is the best thing for him right now.
Let's just hope this rumor turns out to be false so the whole thing can be put behind us and we can finally move on to preparing for this next season.
If you read, all of Scott Favre's commits you will see that, Scott is really said, his opinion. He said he hasn't talked to Brett in a while. Basically he says he knows that Mike McCarthy and Brett were talking a lot. Basically Scott's commits were his opinion and stuff he knew from a while ago. I'm told Bonita Favre's commits are really old, I don't know if that is true or not, but really how much do you tell your Mother about your job? Favre could be different from me, but I try not to talk about my job at all. Over half of what the media is talking about is old, or out of context. All this new media is just some big news for people to talk about, during the slow time.
You said "Why is it Thompsons job to ask Favre to unretire? It's not. (And that's not to suggest that Demovsky thinks so) Is it just me, or is the ball pretty much in Favre's court?" and I have to say thank you for pointing that out. Brett Favre is a big boy and he is the one who has to decide whether or not he wants to play. If Favre needs to be convinced to come back when he had his teammates wanting him back, a decent shot at a Super Bowl, his daughters encouraging him and $12 million then the passion to play that was always there isn't anymore. I would have loved to see Brett play one more year but I don't want him to need to be convinced, I want him back only if he actually wants to play on his own. Ted Thompson gave Favre the space to make his own decision and once Favre did TT respected that decision enough to act as if it was final. He's sending Favre his locker and he's making sure the first game post-Favre is still all about Favre. He's respecting Favre's legacy but also making sure the team is able to perform without him.
Ted Thompson's job isn't to fire up Favre. That is Favre's job. Ted Thompson gave Favre an extremely talented team, including a heck of a running game that takes a lot of the pressure off of Favre. I'll miss Favre but it is really time (in my opinion) for people to stop reporting on unsubstantiated rumors - especially when Favre himself has said they are just rumors - and to stop blaming Ted Thompson.
Well said, bluerose.
Post a Comment