Cappster wrote:They cut Pennington because he made too much money.
that makes sense and ainge might not be a bad third guy
Cappster wrote:langleyparkjoe wrote:We won't see Favre anymore (according to his contract) unless we meet the Jets in the superbowl. If he plays past his contract than I think we'll see him in 2011 since we just played the AFC East last year?
We might see him in preseason since we play the jets after Buffalo.
Right, Fios.Fios wrote:The Jets (who, coincidentally, gave up 53 sacks last year, 4th worst in the NFL) are counting on the notion that, of the past three seasons for Favre, two of them were flukes and the most recent one was a truer measure of what he is capable of at this point in his career. Because if they get the Brett of '05 or '06 (47 INTs to 38 TDs, average passer rating of 72) they are going to regret having made this deal.
Fios wrote:The Jets (who, coincidentally, gave up 53 sacks last year, 4th worst in the NFL) are counting on the notion that, of the past three seasons for Favre, two of them were flukes and the most recent one was a truer measure of what he is capable of at this point in his career. Because if they get the Brett of '05 or '06 (47 INTs to 38 TDs, average passer rating of 72) they are going to regret having made this deal.
langleyparkjoe wrote:Yea man, pretty much it was Favre who was doing all the beefing. He cried saying he wanted to retire, changed his mind and tried to put it on the Packers; that's not cool. He expects them to say "ok Bret, its yours again but can you give us a year notice when you REALLY retire for the 4th time"?
jeremyroyce wrote:langleyparkjoe wrote:Yea man, pretty much it was Favre who was doing all the beefing. He cried saying he wanted to retire, changed his mind and tried to put it on the Packers; that's not cool. He expects them to say "ok Bret, its yours again but can you give us a year notice when you REALLY retire for the 4th time"?
Did you ever stop to think that the Packers forced him to retire? You know whats really interesting is that nobody is talking about when the Packers hired McCarthy Favre was going to happily retire THEN. However Ted Thompson got on his knees and begged Favre to come to the Packers and continue his career and so Favre did Thompson a favor. Its very interesting when the team holds a press conference that Favre is going to retire before Favre announces his retirement. The writing is on the wall man the Packers made it clear that they were done with him. Favre is not the problem its the Packers. The Packers lied to Favre, and the other thing you don't ask a player right after the season, are you going to retire. Favre needs time to talk it over with his family. I'm sorry but I have been following this story so close and I am really pissed at the Packers, I will promise you that the Packers will regret trading Brett Favre.
Fios wrote:The Jets (who, coincidentally, gave up 53 sacks last year, 4th worst in the NFL) are counting on the notion that, of the past three seasons for Favre, two of them were flukes and the most recent one was a truer measure of what he is capable of at this point in his career. Because if they get the Brett of '05 or '06 (47 INTs to 38 TDs, average passer rating of 72) they are going to regret having made this deal.
Irn-Bru wrote:Fios wrote:The Jets (who, coincidentally, gave up 53 sacks last year, 4th worst in the NFL) are counting on the notion that, of the past three seasons for Favre, two of them were flukes and the most recent one was a truer measure of what he is capable of at this point in his career. Because if they get the Brett of '05 or '06 (47 INTs to 38 TDs, average passer rating of 72) they are going to regret having made this deal.
Well, keep in mind too that the Jets signed guard Alan Faneca and tackle Damien Woody this off season.
Also, I do recall hearing a lot of talk before this past year (the o7 season) that GB had been a young team that was just starting to get on a roll at the end of the 06 season. Looking at the team's statistics and Favre's statistics on profootball reference, I have to conclude that last year was a bit more than just a fluke.
Even watching him play last year (I think I saw something lke 5-6 games, between the NFC East matchups, Thanksgiving, and the playoffs) convinced me that he was still a legit player. Just my opinion, though.
skinsfan1963 wrote:the skins play them in preseason,not that it matters.i just hated to see a 1st ballott HOFer get teated like crap!
Fios wrote:The Jets (who, coincidentally, gave up 53 sacks last year, 4th worst in the NFL) are counting on the notion that, of the past three seasons for Favre, two of them were flukes and the most recent one was a truer measure of what he is capable of at this point in his career. Because if they get the Brett of '05 or '06 (47 INTs to 38 TDs, average passer rating of 72) they are going to regret having made this deal.
RayNAustin wrote:The important point no one is discussing is the impact of the trade itself on the Packers/Packer fans.
If I were a Packer fan, I'd be totally pissed off. How do you trade Favre after the career he;s had there, including just a play or two away from the Super Bowl last season? Especially since they have no "proven" replacement for him. It's not like he lost his starting job to a better player.
It just seems to me that the FO in Green Bay are smoking some wild stuff up there, and they are going to be hated by the fans, and crucified by the media if Rogers doesn't play like.....Brett Favre. It's a no win situation, because Rogers is unproven, yet the Packers are a legit contender.
Say what you will about Favre, but he could have left Green Bay anytime he wanted to over all these years. It just seems like the Franchise played this the wrong way....
I can only imagine what we'd be saying about Snyder if Favre was a Redskin all-time great.
Irn-Bru wrote:RayNAustin wrote:The important point no one is discussing is the impact of the trade itself on the Packers/Packer fans.
If I were a Packer fan, I'd be totally pissed off. How do you trade Favre after the career he;s had there, including just a play or two away from the Super Bowl last season? Especially since they have no "proven" replacement for him. It's not like he lost his starting job to a better player.
I thought I had heard that the last report was Favre was unhappy with an open competition for the QB starting job.
Fios wrote:The Jets (who, coincidentally, gave up 53 sacks last year, 4th worst in the NFL) are counting on the notion that, of the past three seasons for Favre, two of them were flukes and the most recent one was a truer measure of what he is capable of at this point in his career. Because if they get the Brett of '05 or '06 (47 INTs to 38 TDs, average passer rating of 72) they are going to regret having made this deal.
KazooSkinsFan wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:RayNAustin wrote:The important point no one is discussing is the impact of the trade itself on the Packers/Packer fans.
If I were a Packer fan, I'd be totally pissed off. How do you trade Favre after the career he;s had there, including just a play or two away from the Super Bowl last season? Especially since they have no "proven" replacement for him. It's not like he lost his starting job to a better player.
I thought I had heard that the last report was Favre was unhappy with an open competition for the QB starting job.
I think this is one of those statements that's literally true but misses some of the connotation. I think what he was upset about was them saying "No," then sort of backhandedly saying OK, you can TRY OUT for the job. I agree with him that attitude was there based on what I heard. I didn't take it that the job was competitive that was the issue so much as the "we don't want you but if you insist you can try out for it" was.
Now I'm not arguing that he shouldn't have said "Fine, I'll come in and win it," I'm just saying that his not wanting to compete for the job, period, doesn't really capture his issue. Again I'm explaining how I saw it, not arguing he was right.
VetSkinsFan wrote:On the other side of the fence (which is where I'm sitting) is the drama ain't worth it. Granted, the Pack may never have anyone of his caliber in our lifetimes, but the soap opera has got to stop. It's distracting for the team, the coaching staff, but more importantly, for Aaron Rogers. If he's supposed to take the reigns when Favre finally spllits, this every off season waiting game has got to get old and wear on his confidence. The FO finally got tored of 'The Days of Favre's Life' and moved on and I commend the FO reaching down, grabbing their sack, and making that call!
KazooSkinsFan wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:On the other side of the fence (which is where I'm sitting) is the drama ain't worth it. Granted, the Pack may never have anyone of his caliber in our lifetimes, but the soap opera has got to stop. It's distracting for the team, the coaching staff, but more importantly, for Aaron Rogers. If he's supposed to take the reigns when Favre finally spllits, this every off season waiting game has got to get old and wear on his confidence. The FO finally got tored of 'The Days of Favre's Life' and moved on and I commend the FO reaching down, grabbing their sack, and making that call!
Keep in mind the Packers ALWAYS had the power to end it. They could have cut him at any time and had no Brett, no drama, no controversy. The drama was because they did not want to cut Brett, they wanted him to retire, then they wanted compensation for him and they didn't want him to play for a rival. Odd given they were saying he couldn't start for them. If their assessment was he wasn't the answer, wouldn't they WANT him to play for a rival?
BTW, no doubt Brett's been a prima donna through this and each and every year in the past. The thing I disagree with you on though is that he's not worth it. Even good QBs are so hard to find. SF was spoiled for so long on Montana then Young and how long have they been in the wilderness since they both retired? How long have we been in the wilderness since we've had a reliable starting QB we could count on year after year? Then you ratchet that up to one of the great all times. I'd rather deal with a prima donna ego then suck for 15 years as happens so often when teams that forget what it's like trying to find even just a good, reliable quarterback is like.
Fios wrote:jeremyroyce wrote:langleyparkjoe wrote:Yea man, pretty much it was Favre who was doing all the beefing. He cried saying he wanted to retire, changed his mind and tried to put it on the Packers; that's not cool. He expects them to say "ok Bret, its yours again but can you give us a year notice when you REALLY retire for the 4th time"?
Did you ever stop to think that the Packers forced him to retire? You know whats really interesting is that nobody is talking about when the Packers hired McCarthy Favre was going to happily retire THEN. However Ted Thompson got on his knees and begged Favre to come to the Packers and continue his career and so Favre did Thompson a favor. Its very interesting when the team holds a press conference that Favre is going to retire before Favre announces his retirement. The writing is on the wall man the Packers made it clear that they were done with him. Favre is not the problem its the Packers. The Packers lied to Favre, and the other thing you don't ask a player right after the season, are you going to retire. Favre needs time to talk it over with his family. I'm sorry but I have been following this story so close and I am really pissed at the Packers, I will promise you that the Packers will regret trading Brett Favre.
That is absolutely insane ... and you've got some of your "facts" wrong
VetSkinsFan wrote:If you're not careful, though, this will destroy the respect a team has for hte FO and coach