Latest Rumor .... Favre to Tampa

mofobmo31 · Post #1 » by **mofobmo31** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 8:57 pm

I was just driving home from work and on 620 radio they were saying according to Ed Werner of ESPN Favre has been traded to Tampa Bay. They didn't say what they would get in return or any other details. Not sure if it is true or not but if I find anything else I'll keep you updated

mofobmo31 · Post #2 » by **mofobmo31** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:02 pm

Now they are saying just in discussions at the moment

Post #3 » by **paulpressey25** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:18 pm

Actually, these guys are saying it is a done deal and will be announced at the 5pm press conference. And MJS is saying these guys "might" have a legit source here.

http://savebrett.net/home/brett-favre-t ... a-bay.html

cb4_89 · Post #4 » by **cb4_89** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:20 pm

yes this is great. Finally this situation is over with brett not in minny.
I just wonder what we got

crkone · Post #5 » by **crkone** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:28 pm

My source says we received Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, and Gabe Gross for Favre.

Fort Minor · Post #6 » by **Fort Minor** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:30 pm

cb4_89 wrote:yes this is great. Finally this situation is over with brett not in minny.
I just wonder what we got

My guess is a fourth rounder.

Captain Erv · Post #7 » by **Captain Erv** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:32 pm

It better be conditional.

Post #8 » by **humanrefutation** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:38 pm

crkone wrote:My source says we received Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, and Gabe Gross for Favre.

Well, I heard that Chad Clifton is having a problem with the Warren Sapp acquisition, and is demanding a trade to Minnesota.

LeopoldStotch · Post #9 » by **LeopoldStotch** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:38 pm

If true, this is best case scenario.

1. He's gone (and the distraction is greatly reduced)
2. He's not a Vi-queen
3. We get something in return

InsideOut · Post #10 » by **InsideOut** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:39 pm

crkone wrote:My source says we received Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, and Gabe Gross for Favre.

If that's the case my guess is we had to give them more than just Favre.

Post #11 » by **Wade-A-Holic** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:40 pm

I really hope this is true.

The Packers would be stupid to allow Rodgers to be subjected to more "viva Favre" chants, and the Packer fans who ARE subjecting Rodgers to these chants (and showing that they probably won't ever even give him a chance) ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Post #12 » by **humanrefutation** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:40 pm

LeopoldStotch wrote:If true, this is best case scenario.

1. He's gone (and the distraction is greatly reduced)
2. He's not a Vi-queen
3. We get something in return

This was always the best solution (outside of dealing him to NYJ). I just don't get how Favre didn't think that this was the most likely solution two weeks ago. Did he think the Packers would cave? If so, he's even more blind than I thought.

cb4_89 · Post #13 » by **cb4_89** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:41 pm

crkone wrote:My source says we received Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, and Gabe Gross for Favre.

wasnt gabe gross on the jays a few years back? I remember him being crappy before we dealt him for like corey koskie or something.

Captain Erv · Post #14 » by **Captain Erv** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:42 pm

Let's just hope the percentage of fans with Favre blinders on isn't great enough to ruin this season when the dust has settled on this soap opera.

Post #15 » by **humanrefutation** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:42 pm

cb4_89 wrote:
crkone wrote:My source says we received Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, and Gabe Gross for Favre.

wasnt gabe gross on the jays a few years back? I remember him being crappy before we dealt him for like corey koskie or something.

The Jays dealt Zach Jackson, Gross, and Dave Bush for Lyle Overbay two years ago. Now he plays for TB after the Brewers traded him earlier this season.

Captain Erv · Post #16 » by **Captain Erv** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:44 pm

cb4_89 wrote:
crkone wrote:My source says we received Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, and Gabe Gross for Favre.

wasnt gabe gross on the jays a few years back? I remember him being crappy before we dealt him for like corey koskie or something.

We actually traded Lyle Overbay to the Jay for Gross and Dave Bush. Bush is still with the Brewers and we traded Gross to the Rays earlier this season for a low-level prospect. The Brewers also traded for Koskie and he was having a decent season until he got a concussion and couldn't recover. Anyway, back to Brett.

MetroDrugUnit · Post #17 » by **MetroDrugUnit** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:46 pm

Jeff Garcia better not be even metioned in this mess

Chapter29 · Post #18 » by **Chapter29** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 9:57 pm

Wade-A-Holic wrote:I really hope this is true.

The Packers would be stupid to allow Rodgers to be subjected to more "viva Favre" chants, and the Packer fans who ARE subjecting Rodgers to these chants (and showing that they probably won't ever even give him a chance) ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Are you kidding me?

Not that I am chanting anything but Favre is easily the better choice at QB. Easily.

The Packers are clearly (Please Use More Appropriate Word) imo if this is true. It is one better than his retirement assuming we get something decent back, but having Favre represents the best chance to win and that's all that really matters to me.

Of course I am a Packer fan, but I will be rooting for Brett for sure.

skones · Post #19 » by **skones** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 10:02 pm

Chapter29 wrote:
Wade-A-Holic wrote:I really hope this is true.

The Packers would be stupid to allow Rodgers to be subjected to more "viva Favre" chants, and the Packer fans who ARE subjecting Rodgers to these chants (and showing that they probably won't ever even give him a chance) ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Are you kidding me?

Not that I am chanting anything but Favre is easily the better choice at QB. Easily.

The Packers are clearly (Please Use More Appropriate Word) imo if this is true. It is one better than his retirement assuming we get something decent back, but having Favre represents the best chance to win and that's all that really matters to me.

Of course I am a Packer fan, but I will be rooting for Brett for sure.

I don't understand anyone that says Favre is EASILY the better choice at QB. He had his year because he bought into the system instead of doing what HE wanted. Sure Rodgers may not be as good at it, but is it that out of the question to say Favre would be A LOT better. I don't think anyone can say that until they see it.

I mean, isn't it possible for Favre to revert to his play of 2005 and 2006? He was downright bad in both of those seasons.

Not only that, but if the Packers started Favre this season, we don't win a superbowl, and he retires, we're right back where we started, only we DON'T have Rodgers as a long term solution. This team is a team that's clearly built for it's most success down the line. We were the youngest team in the league last year I think. Or maybe one of the youngest two. Wouldn't it be the smart thing to let a good young quarterback grow into his prime with that group?

xTitan · Post #20 » by **xTitan** » Tue Aug 5, 2008 10:12 pm

Chapter29 wrote:
Wade-A-Holic wrote:I really hope this is true.

The Packers would be stupid to allow Rodgers to be subjected to more "viva Favre" chants, and the Packer fans who ARE subjecting Rodgers to these chants (and showing that they probably won't ever even give him a chance) ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Are you kidding me?

Not that I am chanting anything but Favre is easily the better choice at QB. Easily.

The Packers are clearly (Please Use More Appropriate Word) imo if this is true. It is one better than his retirement assuming we get something decent back, but having Favre represents the best chance to win and that's all that really matters to me.

Of course I am a Packer fan, but I will be rooting for Brett for sure.

I am a Packer fan and Favre is like any other opponent to me. I don't believe Favre gives the Packers a chance to win a Superbowl and that has to be your end goal with a 39 year old QB because there is not a future.