Report: Pack offer Favre $20 million to stay home

[xTitan]

If Goodell wants to be a real arbitrator and actually watch out for one of his franchises, his conversation goes something like this to Favre today. "Brett, it is clear to any moron that the Vikings have obviously tampered with you, I want you back in the league more than anything but ethically I can't allow you to go to the Vikings because of the tampering, give TT a REAL list of teams you would be willing to play for and not the 1 team you really want to play for and lets get this finished."

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

I thought that was a joke, It looks photoshopped.

People would walk out of the movie theater complaining how it was a waste of time and nothing like this could happen in real life.

[InsideOut]

Favre is going out of his way to try and stick it to the Packers. I don't see what Harlan or anyone else is supposed to do when Favre's goal is to slash and burn the entire franchise. I see a lot of complaining about the Packers front office over a rumor that was most likely leaked by Favre's camp. So what would you GMs do to solve the situation? Favre has made it clear he has no problems destroying the franchise so how can you bring him into camp? He won't even talk with other teams so how can we trade him? He wants to be released but you can't do that or he signs with the Vikings and we get nothing for him. So someone tell me what Harlan does to solve this...other than just letting Favre has his way? IMO at some point someone was going to have to force a kicking and screaming Favre to retire and that person was going to be in a no win situation. TT got the short straw on this one.

I also don't see the big deal about the $20 million so called bribe. In the NBA teams pay players tens of millions just to go away. Portland traded for Francis and then paid him to go away. Guys get bought out all the time. They even came up with the Allen Houston rule to make guys like him and Finley go away. So why is this such a big deal? The Packers end up paying him less money and Favre maybe ends up making more money than if he gets released. I mean how much can the Vikings even afford to pay Favre for this season? Either way a good president looks at all possible options and discusses them with the player. This may have been option #25 on the Packers list and only came up after Favre said I won't be traded, I won't be a back-up, I want you to release me so I can sign with the Vikings and if I show up at camp my goal is to burn the place down. At that point wouldn't the Packers be stupid not to explore every option? Maybe the deal was we'll pay you $20 million to be a "consultant" for the next 10 years. If Favre says yes everyone’s happy. If Favre says no and honors what must have been a private conversation then nobody is the wiser. If Favre stabs the president in the back and leeks the "bribe" story to the national media then I guess Favre wins because you all turn on the team. Looks like Favre has great PR people after all. Besides, people come up with bad solutions to problems all the time. Edison had a bunch of stupid ideas when it came to inventing the light bulb. However, he’s not judged on the hundreds of bad ideas that failed…he is praised for finding the one that worked. Before you all rip Packer management why not wait to judge them on their final solution that may work instead of the ones that that Favre shot down along the way. This philosophy will help keep you from calling everyone an idiot because seldom do people solve difficult problems on the first try.

[Neusch23]

When has Brett ever been motivated by money? He played well, and the money came.

this isn't the dolphins paying Rickey a couple mil to stay away. This is the Green Bay Packers trying to bribe one of the greatest players in the history of the game to stay away....

Now. We don't know the history. This obviously has to go well beyond "We've moved on".

Don Hutson retired multiple times. Vince Lombardi retired, then got his release. Some of you people are treating this as if this is the first time any player has wanted to un-retire.

Brett is the BETTER QB. Simple as that. Rodgers may be a better fit for the new offense, but he should be, they designed it around his talents.

But that doesn't mean that you can go back to what you did last year. You have 24 months of installing that offense vs about 4 installing this one.

Trade him to the Vikings. That is Brett's second choice. Put him there, and move on if you really wanted to move on. Stop being sooooo damn scared of him. Either make him your QB Thompson, or get him to where he wants to go....because no matter how much money you throw at him....he isn't going away.




on a side note...think of how Grant must feel....you can't meet in the middle on a deal but you can give Brett 20 mil to stay away?

[MickeyDavis]

I realize that what Harlan would have done is a moot point because he's gone but I have no doubt things would have played out differently had he still been in charge. Let's look at the dynamics:

Thompson/Favre - I think we all agree that they don't get along at all.

Harlan/Thompson - Harlan hired Thompson, they had a very good relationship which went back to when TT was here the first time.

Murphy/Thompson - Thompson was not Murphy's hire and they had no relationship prior to Murphy being hired.

Harlan/Favre - They've been close for years, Harlan was here for Brett's entire career.

Murphy/Favre - No connection, Favre may have met Murphy once after he was hired but that's it.

My opinion (and I may be way off base here) is that if Harlan was still in charge Favre would not have done the assinine text message/voicemail/surrogates/Greta interview thing at all. He would have called up Harlan and told him he changed his mind and wants to come back.

At that point Harlan would have sat down with Thompson and Favre and worked it out. Whether the result would have been Favre coming back to Green Bay, being traded or being released I don't know. But I do know that Harlan would have resolved it one way or another well before training camp had started.

It's not Murphy's fault that he's new and has no personal connection with Thompson or Favre. But it's a big reason things have played out the way they have (IMHO).

[MetroDrugUnit]

Yes, we want to move on but we're not going to stock up a direct competitor. That is why they make top sales and other corporate officers sign a non compete clause, so when they leave they aren't a direct competitor. We're not going to let Farve go there if we can help it. We are within our rights as an organization and fortunatly he is under contract which was mutualy agreed upon by the Packers and Farve when it was signed. If Goodell gets in the middle of this and makes us trade him to the team that we currently are feuding with over tampering with it would open Pandora's Box. We should just stand pat by our decision. If we want to take Farve backfine, but don't let Farve and the NFL bully us into a decision that is going to haunt this organization for decades.

[xTitan]

When has Brett ever been motivated by money? He played well, and the money came.

this isn't the dolphins paying Rickey a couple mil to stay away. This is the Green Bay Packers trying to bribe one of the greatest players in the history of the game to stay away....

Now. We don't know the history. This obviously has to go well beyond "We've moved on".

Don Hutson retired multiple times. Vince Lombardi retired, then got his release. Some of you people are treating this as if this is the first time any player has wanted to un-retire.

Brett is the BETTER QB. Simple as that. Rodgers may be a better fit for the new offense, but he should be, they designed it around his talents.

But that doesn't mean that you can go back to what you did last year. You have 24 months of installing that offense vs about 4 installing this one.

Trade him to the Vikings. That is Brett's second choice. Put him there, and move on if you really wanted to move on. Stop being sooooo damn scared of him. Either make him your QB Thompson, or get him to where he wants to go....because no matter how much money you throw at him....he isn't going away.




on a side note...think of how Grant must feel....you can't meet in the middle on a deal but you can give Brett 20 mil to stay away?

Some could argue that Favre has been all about money and records for the past three years since he began this nonsense. Favre has said he didn't care about records and that he wouldn't come back and play if the Packers had no chance to win a Superbowl, yet he came back last year with a number of records in reach, to a team, that he repeatedly said over the course of last season that he was shocked they were winning. That does not sound like a guy who believed from the beginning they were a "Superbowl" contender, so basically he came back to break records and make money. Favre has always said the right things but often his actions have not backed up his words. Why then, when you have a 13-3 season and a chance at a Superbowl, do you quit not only once but twice??

As far as a better QB goes I would have said that Favre definitely gives you a better chance to win in the regular season than Rodgers, but now I am not so sure. The previous 2 years when Favre was awful, he didn't put in nearly as much work and effort as he put in last year when he was very successful, up until Thanksgiving. Throw in the fact that I am still not convinced he wants to play for the Packers at all, I am not sure he gives you a great chance to win, as a matter of fact I think he has blown up this team whether he QB's or not. Lets also not overlook the fact that Favre has been bad after Thanksgiving and for the most part a bad playoff QB since the 2nd half debacle against Denver in the Superbowl. For all of you who keep saying 1 bad play, it was a a terrible second half against the Giants, full of bad plays.

I do agree with the Grant thing however, I don't care how good you think Jackson looks, you have to have 2 quality RB's to compete in today's NFL. I don't think Grant's requests are unreasonable, even if he ends up splitting time with Jackson.

[Lippo]

Lets do a "longest yard" skit w/ Brett and have him play the entire pre-season, and have the O-Line just stand there while Brett get pulverized. Hell, make him return punts. Teach the traitor a lesson. The Vikings are his 1st choice, not the Packers. I'd go as far as to say Brett would have no motivation to win even as a Packer anymore and may give little or no effort.

He has a Vendetta against TT and the Pakcers and wants to see them fail at this point.

[InsideOut]

When has Brett ever been motivated by money? He played well, and the money came.

this isn't the dolphins paying Rickey a couple mil to stay away. This is the Green Bay Packers trying to bribe one of the greatest players in the history of the game to stay away....

Now. We don't know the history. This obviously has to go well beyond "We've moved on".

Don Hutson retired multiple times. Vince Lombardi retired, then got his release. Some of you people are treating this as if this is the first time any player has wanted to un-retire.

Brett is the BETTER QB. Simple as that. Rodgers may be a better fit for the new offense, but he should be, they designed it around his talents.

But that doesn't mean that you can go back to what you did last year. You have 24 months of installing that offense vs about 4 installing this one.

Trade him to the Vikings. That is Brett's second choice. Put him there, and move on if you really wanted to move on. Stop being sooooo damn scared of him. Either make him your QB Thompson, or get him to where he wants to go....because no matter how much money you throw at him....he isn't going away.




on a side note...think of how Grant must feel....you can't meet in the middle on a deal but you can give Brett 20 mil to stay away?

Another opinion on how you can't treat Favre like many other NBA and NFL players have been treated. And then people wonder why he acts like he entitled to get his way whenever he wants it. This entire drama reminds me of a quote. A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. - Dwight D. Eisenhower. Favre's principles went out the window a while back so excuse me if I feel the privileges you want to bestow on him should also go out the window.

Yes, other greats have un-retired. Only I don't recall them flip-flopping for four or five years and then flip flopping on it 4 more times in the space of about 3 weeks. To compare what Favre has been doing for years now to what these other guys did is apples and oranges. I can't think of anyone in the real world that could do what Favre did and still have a job. No boss would put up with that garbage. But then again he's Favre and you feel common sense rules and etiquette the rest of us live by shouldn't apply to him because he can throw a ball.

Please stop with the Packers are sooooooo damn scared Favre. It's just silly. Favre is light years better than the current Vikings QB. Do you really need it explained to you why you don't want to solve your biggest rivals QB problem? If it helps to clarify the situation the Packers wouldn't trade the Vikings any QB (not just Favre) if they felt it would help the Vikings. This is why rule #1 in trading is don't trade inside your division. Have you ever heard that saying before?

As long as Favre is playing and AR is on the bench a person could always make the argument Favre is better now so he should start. So does that mean Favre should start until he's 45, 50, 60...? Seriously, when is it OK to ever think given a chance AR would start playing better than Favre? Go back 2 and 3 years ago and you'll see Favre sucked. He had 38 TDs and 47 picks. He had a QB rating in the low 70s. Even at his worst guys like you were saying Favre should still start over giving AR a chance. After all it wasn't his fault but the coaches and other players that Favre had a worse QB rating that even the laughed at Bears QB. And if Favre comes out this season and throws 18 TDs and 22 picks with a 71.5 QB rating you'll still want Favre out there next season because he played well in 2006 and you'll think he still has that old magic inside him. Besides, you can't trust starting AR because he'll break his leg in the first game. So tell us, if you can't bench Favre after two crappy seasons then when is it ever going to be OK to bench Favre? If 10 years of crapping the bed in the playoffs and back to back bad seasons wasn't enough to move on then what would it take? If three straight seasons of throwing twice as many picks as TDs after thanksgiving doesn't convince you age is catching up with him then what will. If Favre himself saying he can't take the cold and isn't sure he wants the ball with the game on the line isn't enough to convince you the fire in his belly isn't gone then what would? What more signs do you need to see that now is the time to see what AR can do?

[Rockmaninoff]

Lets do a "longest yard" skit w/ Brett and have him play the entire pre-season, and have the O-Line just stand there while Brett get pulverized. Hell, make him return punts. Teach the traitor a lesson. The Vikings are his 1st choice, not the Packers. I'd go as far as to say Brett would have no motivation to win even as a Packer anymore and may give little or no effort.

He has a Vendetta against TT and the Pakcers and wants to see them fail at this point.

Come on now. All reports have stated that he would prefer to come back as the starter on the Green Bay Packers. All reports have also stated that the Packers don't want him back as the starter, going as far as trying to bribe him to remain a retired member of the Packers.

He wants to play. Of course his next obvious choice for a destination is the Vikings. The team with the most talent, still lacking a quarterback. The place other than Green Bay (because they won't let him compete for the starting position) that he feels he has the best chance to go out a winner.

Don't take it personally. It's the entertainment business. You expect Favre to be loyal when no loyalty is being shown to him?

Some could argue that Favre has been all about money and records for the past three years since he began this nonsense. Favre has said he didn't care about records and that he wouldn't come back and play if the Packers had no chance to win a Superbowl, yet he came back last year with a number of records in reach, to a team, that he repeatedly said over the course of last season that he was shocked they were winning. That does not sound like a guy who believed from the beginning they were a "Superbowl" contender, so basically he came back to break records and make money. Favre has always said the right things but often his actions have not backed up his words. Why then, when you have a 13-3 season and a chance at a Superbowl, do you quit not only once but twice??

As far as a better QB goes I would have said that Favre definitely gives you a better chance to win in the regular season than Rodgers, but now I am not so sure. The previous 2 years when Favre was awful, he didn't put in nearly as much work and effort as he put in last year when he was very successful, up until Thanksgiving. Throw in the fact that I am still not convinced he wants to play for the Packers at all, I am not sure he gives you a great chance to win, as a matter of fact I think he has blown up this team whether he QB's or not. Lets also not overlook the fact that Favre has been bad after Thanksgiving and for the most part a bad playoff QB since the 2nd half debacle against Denver in the Superbowl. For all of you who keep saying 1 bad play, it was a a terrible second half against the Giants, full of bad plays.

I do agree with the Grant thing however, I don't care how good you think Jackson looks, you have to have 2 quality RB's to compete in today's NFL. I don't think Grant's requests are unreasonable, even if he ends up splitting time with Jackson.

Some would say that Favre was pretty damn loyal sticking around for the rebuilding effort in the twilight of his career.

It seems to me that most believed the Packers would have an excellent 2007-2008 season, based upon the strength the team displayed in finishing the 2006-2007 season. Why do you think Favre was so pissed off that the Packers couldn't/didn't want to land Moss. I'd guess it was because he thought the team was in a position to add pieces to put them over the top.

I'd say that Giants loss was a team effort. The Giants had the better lines, Harris and Bush got burnt repeatedly by Burress, and Favre made the fatal error. Saying Rodgers would have had a different outcome in those circumstances, especially considering that the Giants would have had his history and tendencies to use against him in a game plan, is wishful thinking at best.

[Rockmaninoff]

When has Brett ever been motivated by money? He played well, and the money came.

this isn't the dolphins paying Rickey a couple mil to stay away. This is the Green Bay Packers trying to bribe one of the greatest players in the history of the game to stay away....

Now. We don't know the history. This obviously has to go well beyond "We've moved on".

Don Hutson retired multiple times. Vince Lombardi retired, then got his release. Some of you people are treating this as if this is the first time any player has wanted to un-retire.

Brett is the BETTER QB. Simple as that. Rodgers may be a better fit for the new offense, but he should be, they designed it around his talents.

But that doesn't mean that you can go back to what you did last year. You have 24 months of installing that offense vs about 4 installing this one.

Trade him to the Vikings. That is Brett's second choice. Put him there, and move on if you really wanted to move on. Stop being sooooo damn scared of him. Either make him your QB Thompson, or get him to where he wants to go....because no matter how much money you throw at him....he isn't going away.




on a side note...think of how Grant must feel....you can't meet in the middle on a deal but you can give Brett 20 mil to stay away?

Another opinion on how you can't treat Favre like many other NBA and NFL players have been treated. And then people wonder why he acts like he entitled to get his way whenever he wants it. This entire drama reminds me of a quote. A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. - Dwight D. Eisenhower. Favre's principles went out the window a while back so excuse me if I feel the privileges you want to bestow on him should also go out the window.

Yes, other greats have un-retired. Only I don't recall them flip-flopping for four or five years and then flip flopping on it 4 more times in the space of about 3 weeks. To compare what Favre has been doing for years now to what these other guys did is apples and oranges. I can't think of anyone in the real world that could do what Favre did and still have a job. No boss would put up with that garbage. But then again he's Favre and you feel common sense rules and etiquette the rest of us live by shouldn't apply to him because he can throw a ball.

Please stop with the Packers are sooooooo damn scared Favre. It's just silly. Favre is light years better than the current Vikings QB. Do you really need it explained to you why you don't want to solve your biggest rivals QB problem? If it helps to clarify the situation the Packers wouldn't trade the Vikings any QB (not just Favre) if they felt it would help the Vikings. This is why rule #1 in trading is don't trade inside your division. Have you ever heard that saying before?

As long as Favre is playing and AR is on the bench a person could always make the argument Favre is better now so he should start. So does that mean Favre should start until he's 45, 50, 60...? Seriously, when is it OK to ever think given a chance AR would start playing better than Favre? Go back 2 and 3 years ago and you'll see Favre sucked. He had 38 TDs and 47 picks. He had a QB rating in the low 70s. Even at his worst guys like you were saying Favre should still start over giving AR a chance. After all it wasn't his fault but the coaches and other players that Favre had a worse QB rating that even the laughed at Bears QB. And if Favre comes out this season and throws 18 TDs and 22 picks with a 71.5 QB rating you'll still want Favre out there next season because he played well in 2006 and you'll think he still has that old magic inside him. Besides, you can't trust starting AR because he'll break his leg in the first game. So tell us, if you can't bench Favre after two crappy seasons then when is it ever going to be OK to bench Favre? If 10 years of crapping the bed in the playoffs and back to back bad seasons wasn't enough to move on then what would it take? If three straight seasons of throwing twice as many picks as TDs after thanksgiving doesn't convince you age is catching up with him then what will. If Favre himself saying he can't take the cold and isn't sure he wants the ball with the game on the line isn't enough to convince you the fire in his belly isn't gone then what would? What more signs do you need to see that now is the time to see what AR can do?

I don't really understand this post, as it seems pretty clear to just about everybody that it is time to move on.

Packers management believes in Aaron Rodgers, we understand that. They don't want to let Favre compete for the starting job. Understood. Favre doesn't want to accept a bribe in order to remain a retired member of the Green Bay Packers. Got it. What is the next step? Trade or release. Where will he accept a trade to? Minnesota. Where will he go if he is released? Minnesota.

[xTitan]

Some would say that Favre was pretty damn loyal sticking around for the rebuilding effort in the twilight of his career.

It seems to me that most believed the Packers would have an excellent 2007-2008 season, based upon the strength the team displayed in finishing the 2006-2007 season. Why do you think Favre was so pissed off that the Packers couldn't/didn't want to land Moss. I'd guess it was because he thought the team was in a position to add pieces to put them over the top.

I'd say that Giants loss was a team effort. The Giants had the better lines, Harris and Bush got burnt repeatedly by Burress, and Favre made the fatal error. Saying Rodgers would have had a different outcome in those circumstances, especially considering that the Giants would have had his history and tendencies to use against him in a game plan, is wishful thinking at best.

It is easy to see how people will never come together on this issue because I do not agree with 1 thing you said...and although I never mentioned Rodgers and the Giants game 1 time, I am guessing you would have said the same exact thing about the Dallas game, when Favre was awful and Rodgers was very good leading them back from the dead....so your crystal ball is obviously the brand to go with.

[Worm Guts]

?

On a serious note, I'm ready to make the deal with the Vikings: Send Favre to Minny for Pat Williams (assuming he's healthy) and two conditional draft picks. The Vikes 2009 first rounder if Favre starts at least 12 games. If not, we get their second rounder. Then if Favre starts those games and we get the first, we also get their second if they make the playoffs. Otherwise the second pick is a 4th rounder.

How about a third round pick? Even if you ignore that the Pack has their backs against the wall, we're talking about a 38 year old QB.

[Rockmaninoff]

Some would say that Favre was pretty damn loyal sticking around for the rebuilding effort in the twilight of his career.

It seems to me that most believed the Packers would have an excellent 2007-2008 season, based upon the strength the team displayed in finishing the 2006-2007 season. Why do you think Favre was so pissed off that the Packers couldn't/didn't want to land Moss. I'd guess it was because he thought the team was in a position to add pieces to put them over the top.

I'd say that Giants loss was a team effort. The Giants had the better lines, Harris and Bush got burnt repeatedly by Burress, and Favre made the fatal error. Saying Rodgers would have had a different outcome in those circumstances, especially considering that the Giants would have had his history and tendencies to use against him in a game plan, is wishful thinking at best.

It is easy to see how people will never come together on this issue because I do not agree with 1 thing you said...and although I never mentioned Rodgers and the Giants game 1 time, I am guessing you would have said the same exact thing about the Dallas game, when Favre was awful and Rodgers was very good leading them back from the dead....so your crystal ball is obviously the brand to go with.

All that I would say about the Dallas game, is that Dallas had no real way to game plan for the tendencies of Aaron Rodgers. I agree that he had a nice game.

I got no crystal ball, but if the Packers are ready to move on, then I'm ready for a resolution.

[MickeyDavis]

Ah yes, the Giants. It's been a few months but I seem to recall that still in their prime Tony Romo and Tom Brady didn't exactly have great games and lead their heavily favored teams to victory either... "But they didn't throw an interception in overtime!". Very true. Neither QB got their teams that far in the game. Both lost in regulation.

[Neusch23]

Look, I am done talking to the Favre haters. There is a big difference between not liking the actions that have happened on both sides, but be real, how this has played out isn't one sided at all. really, everyone here should be torn.

Bottom line, the Packers are scared, or it wouldn't have come to this. They know Brett is still a damn good QB. They know he will make nearly every team in the league better. They know he still has a lot left in the tank, and that he is probably now more motivated than ever to prove it.

If he goes to the Vikes, like I think he will, we are now playing for the wild card this year. Simple as that. They are a very good team, and are weakest at a very key position.

Either give Brett his helmet, which with it comes all of the pressure of the season, or trade him to the team he wants to go to.

He wants to be a Packer, if the FO doesn't want him, he isn't going away. It is time they act, and stop lieing to him, and to all the fans. Make a real move, man up, end this.

[jerrod]

if favre doesn't want it, i'll take it. i'll gladly stay away from lambeau for 2 mil a year

anyways, is that even within the rules of the nfl's cba?

[Neusch23]

if favre doesn't want it, i'll take it. i'll gladly stay away from lambeau for 2 mil a year

anyways, is that even within the rules of the nfl's cba?

I am sure it would have to be structured as part of a contract buy out, where he is paid by the pack to stay retired for said period of time. That way he doesn't go to a different team.

[madfx]

I agree with InsideOut. This was leaked by Favre's camp so of course you release a statement that spins things in your favor. Whether it was money for a consultant position, a jest, we don't know. If it was option number one for us, then that is pretty classless. I think it's clear he wants to play. It's not about money. That's why I find this hard to believe at face value.

However, if we aren't worried about looking great, what about this solution:
Take Favre back on the roster. Tell him to take the field for special teams duty. If he does, it'd be great fun to watch and we'll see how tough he truly is. If he doesn't we can suspend him for conduct detrimental to the team and keep him away from the team. I like it!

[InsideOut]

I'm not a Favre hater. Favre wants a release so he can join the Vikes and beat my Packers. That makes me a Packer supporter. If Favre would have stayed un-retired the first time and started like TT said he could then I'd have supported him as well.

Please "man up" and answer my original question. What does Favre need to do that he hasn't already done for you to agree it's a good idea to give AR a shot?