Favre says Thompson begged him not to return

[Rockmaninoff]

I was firmly on the organizations side when this mess started but Thompson is really starting to blow it. He lost a lot of credibility by letting Brett call his bluff on the whole coming to training camp thing. This situation has already killed the Packers '08 season, IMO, and the longer it goes on its going to kill the program that Thompson has built for the long term success of this team. For the first time I see a legitimate possibility that this could be the beginning of the end for Thompson. I just can't see this young leader-less team recovering from this mess.


It's becoming clearer and clearer that in the end as he's accustomed to Brett will get his way.

Yep.

I mean, I wasn't on the side of the organization, but everything else in this post I agree with. For me, it's the whole individual over the collective thing. Anyway...

At this point, the best thing for the Packers to do would be to release Favre from his contract. I think it's unbelievable that the Packers thought that they would be able to control AND cash in off his legacy, with Favre being but a benevolent witness.

The solution is to put it firmly in Favre's hands and go on with their business. If they believe in Rodgers, then Favre shouldn't be this much of a threat.

[paulpressey25]

This won't bring Ted Thompson down.....

Bad drafting would bring Ted Thompson down.......

The more I think about this, the more I think Favre wanted to go play in MN because he'd have a free ride there with Bevell and Childress. He's probably afraid of the NY media market and Gruden.

Ted can't let him just go to a division rival with no QB. If Brett wants to come in as the backup, let's welcome him to town.

[Rockmaninoff]

This won't bring Ted Thompson down.....

Bad drafting would bring Ted Thompson down.......

The more I think about this, the more I think Favre wanted to go play in MN because he'd have a free ride there with Bevell and Childress. He's probably afraid of the NY media market and Gruden.

Ted can't let him just go to a division rival with no QB. If Brett wants to come in as the backup, let's welcome him to town.

I'd say he wanted to go to Minnesota because of knows some of the coaches and players, and because they are the most talented team without a quarterback. Isn't it clear that he wants a chance to play for it all, not just a chance to play?

Why can't Ted let him go? Because it would look bad? Well, this situation already looks pretty bad and it won't look any better by forcing Favre to hold a clipboard for Aaron Rodgers.

You see, there are 2 big egos at work here, not just one.

And besides, what's the worst that could happen? From the way that he is being talked about on here and in the media, Favre would lead them to the Playoffs, only to blow it by throwing an untimely interception or 5. That's what he does right? That's what the Vikings do, right?

The Packers on the other hand, will have the quarterback that will play with more control and accuracy, and have the ability to tuck the ball and run if necessary (nevermind reliability). What's Ted afraid of?

Oh yeah, he wants to have his cake and eat it too.

[xTitan]

Only a moron would let Favre go,this is a damn business, you have an asset you get back and asset of equal or greater value.....I can't believe you Favre worhsippers can't see that this has been Favre's goal from the beginning, to play with the Vikings. Why the hell do you think he waited until July to all of a sudden want to come back? Why do you think he has been pushing for a release since day #1? Why in the hell do you think he won't give TT a list of teams he wants to be traded to? The answer is simple, becuase it has been the Vikings since day #1....................Favre has played his loyalists for the fools they are, he has had the so-called Packer fans turn on there team and Rodgers and he is still battling to get what he really wants, an outright release so he can be a Viking, and you rubes will blame Thomspon, when Favre has been pulling the strings since the beginning. And you would have him give Favre what he wants, there is not 1 intelligent, true Packer fan who would release Favre.....you would either be just a Favre fan or a Viking fan.

[Rockmaninoff]

Only a moron would let Favre go,this is a damn business, you have an asset you get back and asset of equal or greater value.....I can't believe you Favre worhsippers can't see that this has been Favre's goal from the beginning, to play with the Vikings. Why the hell do you think he waited until July to all of a sudden want to come back? Why do you think he has been pushing for a release since day #1? Why in the hell do you think he won't give TT a list of teams he wants to be traded to? The answer is simple, becuase it has been the Vikings since day #1....................Favre has played his loyalists for the fools they are, he has had the so-called Packer fans turn on there team and Rodgers and he is still battling to get what he really wants, an outright release so he can be a Viking, and you rubes will blame Thomspon, when Favre has been pulling the strings since the beginning. And you would have him give Favre what he wants, there is not 1 intelligent, true Packer fan who would release Favre.....you would either be just a Favre fan or a Viking fan.

Whoa big shooter, it just seems to me that the only way this gets resolved, is if Favre is released.

I still love the Packers and I'm still a Favre fan. It's possible to be both. You're right, this is a business and it's also entertainment.

I don't hold it against Favre to want to go where he has the best chance for success. That used to be Green Bay, but they don't want him back as a starter.

So, you're trying to tell me that Favre should do what's best for the Packers?

I'm not blaming either party for this mess. It's a battle of egos spurned on by the hands of time. Are you not entertained?

[bucks59]

Whoa big shooter, it just seems to me that the only way this gets resolved, is if Favre is released.

Only because Favre refuses to give the Packers a list of teams to be traded to.

[paulpressey25]

I'm entertained.

But I still don't put this on Ted Thompson because the proximate cause of this mess (legal term for what was the primary cause) goes back on Brett. Favre had the opportunity in January, February and March to tell the Packers "I'm coming back for another year!"

That's all he had to say. Case closed. Instead he waffled and wanted more time which the team couldn't give him. They had a draft, A-Rod and mini-camps to deal with.

If he said in February, before he retired, that he wanted to be released to go play with the Vikings, would the Packers just let him do it? No way....for a variety of reasons, including the fact they don't want their rival to have a competent QB who GB holds the rights to. So why is the situation any different now?

[xTitan]

I don't hold it against Favre to want to go where he has the best chance for success. That used to be Green Bay, but they don't want him back as a starter.

The point I am making is that he DIDN"T want to come back and be a Packer at all this year and still doesn't...starter or not. I believe he was convinced by the Vikings or perhaps his 1 good friend left in this league, Ryan Longwell, to come and play for the Vikings from the start and he used the Packers as a scape goat just to be released....he can say he wants to be a Packer but many in the mainstream believe he has wanted all summer to play for the Vikings and not the Packers.....as Peter King said he will not give them any names of who he would like to play for because it has always been 1 team...the Vikings.

[paulpressey25]

I agree on this Minnesota thing......I really wonder if Favre would be able to deal with the NY media scrutiny he'd get with the Jets.

[MickeyDavis]

Everything in the NFL today is reported on a national level. Sure there are more local reporters in New York than Green Bay but local media doesn't have nearly the influence it used to have. Every snap Favre takes with a new team, every quote, every second of the season will be reported, analyzed and dissected ad naseum regardless of if he is playing in New York, Tampa, Minnesota or anywhere else. His desire to play in Minnesota is simply because he has friends there rather than it being a smaller media market.

[El Duderino]

I agree on this Minnesota thing......I really wonder if Favre would be able to deal with the NY media scrutiny he'd get with the Jets.

More than anything, i just think Brett wants no part of basically living in New York for good parts of a year or two. He's spent his whole life living in small towns and Favre obviously has no desire like most athletes to enjoy the NY nightlife scene. Mix in the Jets were 4-12 last year and New England is in their division, that's probably as unappealing a situation to him as it gets.

Tampa at least offers a weak division, is in the south, Gruden is the coach, and Tampa as a city can offer some sense of normal life vs NY.

If Tampa truly is interested and Thompson isn't asking for an unrealistic return, i can't see a better option outside of the Vikes which won't happen. If those two thing are true, it's then on Brett if he really wants to play football this year. Plus, as a side bonus, Favre would get to play us and i'm sure he'd love to try and stick it to Ted by beating Green Bay.

[xTitan]

For all you "Packer" fans who believe TT should just release Favre so he can go to MN.......from Peter King today, and we know he is in the Favre camp.

• PLEASE TELL ME YOU'RE KIDDING. From Paul S., of Walnut Creek, Calif.: "Why are the Packers so afraid of Brett Favre playing for Minnesota? Or rather, why are they so willing to publicly display their fear of Favre playing for Minnesota? If they really believe that Aaron Rodgers is their quarterback of the future, Packers management should exhibit confidence in their decision and faith in their new QB. All this hand-wringing about him going to a rival team makes them look weak and insecure. They sound like one of those pathetic guys who wants to break up with his girlfriend, but won't do it because he's afraid of who she might date next."

You're joking, right? You're telling me that you think it'd be smart for Ted Thompson to allow an MVP-caliber player with three years left on his contract to go play for the Packers' archrivals -- at the position this archrival has a significant need? And you'd allow him to go without compensation? I'm glad you're not the general manager of my team.

I echo that last sentence to all the um "Packer" fans who feel the same way as Paul S.

[El Duderino]

Former and long time Packers writer Cliff Christl comments on NFL.com

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8097dce2&template=with-video&confirm=true

GREEN BAY, Wis. -- While it might seem contradictory, in truth, strong leadership often is exerted in subtle ways.

That also happened to be Bob Harlan's style during his 19 years as the Green Bay Packers' principal executive.

He rarely, if ever, overruled the people under him, but he influenced important decisions through his wisdom and guidance, especially in his areas of expertise -- public and community relations. And he did so in such a way that the Packers rarely were embroiled in bitter and enduring controversies during his reign.

Perhaps his lasting legacy will be that he was the best goodwill ambassador this storied, 90-year old franchise ever had.

That's why it's hard to imagine that the ongoing dispute between Brett Favre and the Packers would have dragged on this long or become this contentious if Harlan was still CEO. No matter how one slices it, the Packers likely will start training camp on Monday faced with a PR nightmare like none other in their history.

There was a time in this ongoing soap opera when playing the blame game was senseless.

There were no bad guys when Favre was waffling over his future -- theatrics and all -- and the Packers were deciding to move forward without him as their quarterback. It's still senseless to blame either side for anything that transpired from the time a choked-up Favre announced his retirement in early March until he asked for his release in a letter delivered July 12.

Favre changed his mind about retirement. Big deal. How many coaches and athletes in the pro ranks haven't? Is there anyone who goes through life without wavering or changing course on any number of important decisions?

At the same time, the Packers shouldn't be faulted for deciding to give Favre's job to Aaron Rodgers. Some might find that to be a rather curious decision, considering Favre was coming off a banner season, but it's not an unusual step in the National Football League. Teams are forever looking to replace older players, future Hall of Famers included. As the late George Young, general manager of the New York Giants' first two Super Bowl champions, was fond of saying: "It's a young man's game." The 38-year-old Favre, at least as a Packer, simply became a victim of that tenet.

There are also plenty of historical precedents to defend each side's position.

Favre isn't the first Packers star to retire and then want to unretire.

The late Reggie White announced his retirement before the 1998 season, changed his mind the next day, played another year and announced his retirement again. This time, he sat out a season, returned for one with the Carolina Panthers and finally retired for good on his third try. Hall of Fame tackle Forrest Gregg retired five times -- after the 1965, '68, '69, '70 and '71 seasons -- but didn't follow through until after playing one final season in Dallas. The immortal Don Hutson announced his retirement before each of his last three seasons, only to change his mind each time. Before his last year, 1945, he didn't commit to playing until just 48 hours before the opener. Hutson also considered retiring before the 1939 season, but was coaxed back and reported to camp nine days late.

In fact, Vince Lombardi's retirement as coach of the Packers and Favre's as a player have followed parallel tracks. Lombardi announced his retirement in an emotional press conference soon after Super Bowl II and essentially cited burnout as the reason. And, by all accounts, he regretted his decision by the time training camp arrived five months later. When the 1968 season ended, he asked out of his contract as general manager of the Packers and bolted to Washington to coach again.

On the flip side, Favre also isn't the first Packers great to be pushed out the door. Hall of Famer Paul Hornung, team leader and most valuable player of the Packers' first two championship teams under Lombardi, was dumped in an expansion draft. The legendary Ray Nitschke was benched and essentially shamed into retirement. Hall of Fame tailback and Green Bay native Arnie Herber was waived at the age of 31 during the final week of training camp in 1941, when he was just a season removed from leading the Packers to an NFL title.

But where this latest story line turned ugly was after Favre declared that he wanted to play again and general manager Ted Thompson responded by saying he'd take Favre back, but only as a backup. That's what has given this story life and given the Packers a black eye. It's what has embittered the greatest player in the franchise's history, invited a barrage of criticism from the national media and disaffected many of the team's fans.

After all Favre has done for the franchise -- more than anyone, he rescued it from the misery of the 1970s and ‘80s that threatened its very existence -- the Packers are unwilling to offer him the same opportunity or courtesy they've extended to other older players whose services were no longer needed.

When White decided he wanted to play again in 2000, the Packers willingly released him from his contract. When 12-year veteran William Henderson had the itch to play again last year after being told he no longer fit in the Packers' plans, Thompson released him, announcing that he was doing so to give Henderson a chance to "pursue other opportunities" with no strings attached.

The hunch here is that there has been only one team for which Favre really wants to play, and that's the Minnesota Vikings. And the reason being is that's the only place where he'd have a legitimate shot at winning another Super Bowl.

The Vikings had the No. 1-ranked run defense in the league last year and have added the best pass rusher in the game in defensive end Jared Allen. In Adrian Peterson, they have the NFL's most explosive runner. And their offensive line is good enough so that Favre shouldn't be constantly running for his life.

All Minnesota needs to become the NFC's preseason favorite is a quarterback.

With any other potential contender -- Tampa Bay, Chicago, Baltimore, the Jets -- Favre would have to carry a full load on offense. And he has suggested in the recent past that such a role would have little appeal to him.

No doubt that also has been the Packers' greatest fear -- that Favre will sign with the Vikings. In all likelihood, it was the impetus for their cockamamie response to Favre's request to be released: That he could come back, but only to carry a clipboard.

In other words, they're playing scared.

If Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy truly believe the Packers are a better team with Rodgers at quarterback, they should have the courage of their convictions. If they have as much confidence in Rodgers and their team as they say they do, they shouldn't fear facing Favre in another uniform.

The Packers could have defused this controversy and made this a much less messy divorce if they had given Favre his release soon after he asked for it. Had they exercised the kind of PR savvy that marked the Harlan administration, they would have released Favre and simply announced that they were doing so only to honor his request.

They still could do that and eliminate what could be a major distraction throughout camp.

Or they also could think outside the box and reap a nice return.

Why not trade Favre to the Vikings? After all, that would be the team most likely to part with a high draft pick in return.

Sure, there would be tremendous risk involved. It would substantially improve the Vikings' chances of winning the Super Bowl this coming season. Then again, New England's loss last February served as yet another reminder that championships aren't won on paper. Moreover, many of the Vikings' best players are on the downside of their careers, and such a trade might even hurt them in the long run, especially if they lose another draft pick over the Packers' tampering charge.

Over the past three years, the Packers have said goodbye to two other key players, Darren Sharper and Ryan Longwell, knowing full well that both could sign with the Vikings, as both ultimately did. But rather than fret the consequences, the Packers responded by winning four of the six meetings between the two teams.

If Thompson should have learned anything from his mentor Ron Wolf, it was that when faced with a tough decision, be bold. But he has been anything but as of late.

The Packers have told Favre they don't want him back as a starting quarterback, yet they're acting as if they're terrified that he'll come back to haunt them.

It just doesn't compute.

[Chapter29]

It would be nothing short of retardation if we let him go for nothing, let alone to a division rival. People are actually challenging this? Yeah...ok.

I personally hope that he is brought back and starts for us if he is still able. Given that he was in the MVP race last year, my guess is that he would easily beat out Rogers. If not a back up makes tons of sense as he winds his career down.

Otherwise if these 2 grown men cannot swallow their pride, get some value for him in a trade outside of the division or perhaps conference.

What a joke this has become.

[TheGhostDog]

Why can't Ted let him go?... what's the worst that could happen? From the way that he is being talked about on here and in the media, Favre would lead them to the Playoffs, only to blow it by throwing an untimely interception or 5. That's what he does right? That's what the Vikings do, right?

You're looking at this situation as though it existed in a vacuum, as if it only directly involved Favre and the Packers. The worst that could happen is that a dangerous precedent is set, allowing any NFL player who is unhappy with his contract, or simply wants to play for the team of his choice, to retire and then coerce his current employer to release him from his contract. What you are describing is chaos. Stars could tear up their contracts on a whim and dictate which cities they'll play in (hint: not many would say Green Bay) while the teams that they signed a contract with would receive nothing to compensate them for their loss.

And please don't counter with "but Favre has earned the right" to tear up his contract. That's a slippery slope with no defineable end. If Favre can tear up his contract, then shouldn't Tom Brady and Peyton Manning be able to tear up their own contracts whenever it suits them too? Heck, maybe every year, instead of the Super Bowl winners saying they're going to Disneyland, they should tear up their contract on national TV and say "I'm going wherever I *%^#-well please. I earned it!" Where would it stop? Made the Pro Bowl? Congratulations, you're now a free agent! Special teams player of the week? You earned it kiddo! Legally binding contracts protect both players' and teams' rights; you can't throw that all away for one particular individual, even if he is Brett Favre. As Brett Favre himself has lectured others in the past, if you sign the contract you have to honor it.

[El Duderino]

Otherwise if these 2 grown men cannot swallow their pride, get some value for him in a trade outside of the division or perhaps conference.

What a joke this has become.

One thing i hadn't thought about until Cliff Christl brought it up in the article i posted above is the Bob Harlan factor compared to Murphy.

By all accounts i've ever read, Favre very much liked and has great respect for Harlan. I wonder if Harlan was still in charge compared to a pretty much new novice at the job in Murphy, would a resolution to this have already been done?

While Harlan let his GM's do their job with little to no interference, i really wonder if he could have used his clout/respect to broker some sort of resolution between Ted and Brett before it reached debacle levels? Murphy has been the president for such a short time, i question if he feels like he has the clout yet to intervene in the slightest between his GM and arguably the most important Packer in it's history, at least the most important since the Lombardi days?

[InsideOut]

I can't believe we even have to explain to people why you don't let Favre go for nothing. How do I get these guys in my fantasy league. I think Jay Glazer sums it up best...

"However, legend or no legend, if in any other business an employee, even the top sales manager of all time, calls his boss a liar three times on national television, and then reveals conversations with his boss that were believed to be private and then threatens his bosses ... seriously, how many of those folks would still be employed? How many players in this league would come through unscathed, especially in the wallet?

Now imagine if Mr. Johnny Cool Salesman, it turns out, took such a path for the sole purpose of bolting to a rival company, what does his boss do at this point?"

Yup, let's just give a QBless Vikings Favre for a couple seasons. Makes sense to me.

[MickeyDavis]

Christl's column is spot on.

[ReasonablySober]

Christl's column is spot on.

He wants to use history, whereas there's never been anything like this situation, ever.

Broken down vets Nitchke and Hornung? An expensive safety that had lost a step in Sharper? A fullback? A kicker?

Really?

The QB is the most important position on the field. It's not unreasonable to believe that Green Bay now thinks they have two very good ones in the fold and would prefer to go with the younger one so as not to lose him in a year. I'm 100% positive that Thompson would gladly trade Favre to every team but three: the Detroit Lions, the Minnesota Vikings and the Chicago Bears.

It's not difficult to see why, and for a multitude of reasons. One is Favre knows this team as well as anyone, McCarthy included. Forgive Thompson if he doesn't want to give a division rival someone with that kind of knowledge.

The second goes back to my original point...the Packers obviously feel they have two good QBs and everyone knows the Vikings are a QB away from being the favorite. Why the hell would the Packers bail them out, no matter they cost?

Reverse the situation.....

Say Favre had never retired and Rodgers, fed up with Green Bay, demanded to be dealt or he'd walk when his contract is up. How many here would scream bloody murder if Thompson moved him to Minnesota? What if Rodgers is the next Ben Roethlisberger, Carson Palmer or Tony Romo? What if he's a young guy that comes in and leads his team to contender status from the get-go? What if he has a season like Brady did when he first saw action as a starter?

How much of a nightmare is that if you're a Packers fan? If you're Ted Thompson?

Sure. You may trade him and groom Brohm to be the heir apparent. Maybe Favre commits to two more years and we end up being set at the position regardless. But you don't want to hand a bitter rival, someone you will see two, maybe three times a year, their missing link.

Anyone who sees otherwise is a damn fool.

[paulpressey25]

I don't agree with Christl. Christl talks about needing to take "bold action". Well TT took bold action. He's hanging on to his well-paid asset and not allowing some emotional reprecussions or wanting people to "like him" to hold him back from cutting a smart business deal.

The only part where Christl has merit is in suggesting TT trade him to the Vikings. Tell the Vikes we want a John Hadl return (1, 2, 1, 2, 3) or something close to it and they can have Brett.