RebelFaithful.com

Have not heard anyone talk about what the Packers stand to gain by having a 40 mil dollar back up? They act as if they have Brett by the kahunas. I say Brett has them because I am going to guess that he can block any trade deal and that if he rides the pine then he in effect has all the benefits of retirement without the downside of going broke. I imagine that while Brett is saying he wants to play he is really saying dang this is my last best shot at earning tens of millions of dollars and I better jump on it. Therefore he stands everything to gain and nothing to lose as far as I can see.

rebeloke wrote:Have not heard anyone talk about what the Packers stand to gain by having a 40 mil dollar back up? They act as if they have Brett by the kahunas. I say Brett has them because I am going to guess that he can block any trade deal and that if he rides the pine then he in effect has all the benefits of retirement without the downside of going broke. I imagine that while Brett is saying he wants to play he is really saying dang this is my last best shot at earning tens of millions of dollars and I better jump on it. Therefore he stands everything to gain and nothing to lose as far as I can see.

I think he wants to play. He's put the Packers in a tough situation. Can't blame him for wanting to play, but you can't really blame the Packers for their stance, either. Rodgers is getting the shaft here even if he does start. Unless he wins the SB, he won't be good enough if they could've had Brett back.

lewindha wrote:

rebeloke wrote:Have not heard anyone talk about what the Packers stand to gain by having a 40 mil dollar back up? They act as if they have Brett by the kahunas. I say Brett has them because I am going to guess that he can block any trade deal and that if he rides the pine then he in effect has all the benefits of retirement without the downside of going broke. I imagine that while Brett is saying he wants to play he is really saying dang this is my last best shot at earning tens of millions of dollars and I better jump on it. Therefore he stands everything to gain and nothing to lose as far as I can see.

I think he wants to play. He's put the Packers in a tough situation. Can't blame him for wanting to play, but you can't really blame the Packers for their stance, either. Rodgers is getting the shaft here even if he does start. Unless he wins the SB, he won't be good enough if they could've had Brett back.

and Rogers has been injured twice (?) w/o starting...Brett is of course the Iron Man....

lewindha wrote:

rebeloke wrote:Have not heard anyone talk about what the Packers stand to gain by having a 40 mil dollar back up? They act as if they have Brett by the kahunas. I say Brett has them because I am going to guess that he can block any trade deal and that if he rides the pine then he in effect has all the benefits of retirement without the downside of going broke. I imagine that while Brett is saying he wants to play he is really saying dang this is my last best shot at earning tens of millions of dollars and I better jump on it. Therefore he stands everything to gain and nothing to lose as far as I can see.

I think he wants to play. He's put the Packers in a tough situation. Can't blame him for wanting to play, but you can't really blame the Packers for their stance, either. Rodgers is getting the shaft here even if he does start. Unless he wins the SB, he won't be good enough if they could've had Brett back.

From a business stand point what does GB have to gain by having the highest paid QB in the NFL on the bench? They keep saying that it is a business decision. Meaning they have implemented a new offense surrounding AR. Well okay you got in some new guys but the overall team is not so different that Brett could not give it a shot. I mean Brett even offered to compete for his old job. What more could ask than that?

This is a power struggle. Favre has been affecting, albeit indirectly and probably unintentionally, much of the Packers' personnel decisions for years. The team management is trying to establish their control, but is again finding it difficult; because when Favre speaks, people listen.

I think Favre just wants to play, and win. He knows this is the best Packers team since 1998, and he was able to sniff another Super Bowl last year. He doesn't want to sit at home and watch Rodgers win with "his" team.

Green Bay would be stupid to trade him. First, it would be a terrible for fan relations (you know the customers!). Second, he may actually be better than Rodgers and may fit with the team better (it seemed to work last year). They should just let him back on the team and allow him to compete for the starting job, fair and square. The only possible downside is that Rodgers may be upset. Oh well! I would much prefer to upset Rodgers rather than Favre, the fan base, and all the pundits who will criticize the Packers if Favre is traded.

Although I feel he is a bit self-centered, I support Favre; he has, certainly, earned it.

RebelFIL wrote:This is a power struggle. Favre has been affecting, albeit indirectly and probably unintentionally, much of the Packers' personnel decisions for years. The team management is trying to establish their control, but is again finding it difficult; because when Favre speaks, people listen.

I think Favre just wants to play, and win. He knows this is the best Packers team since 1998, and he was able to sniff another Super Bowl last year. He doesn't want to sit at home and watch Rodgers win with "his" team.

Green Bay would be stupid to trade him. First, it would be a terrible for fan relations (you know the customers!). Second, he may actually be better than Rodgers and may fit with the team better (it seemed to work last year). They should just let him back on the team and allow him to compete for the starting job, fair and square. The only possible downside is that Rodgers may be upset. Oh well! I would much prefer to upset Rodgers rather than Favre, the fan base, and all the pundits who will criticize the Packers if Favre is traded.

Although I feel he is a bit self-centered, I support Favre; he has, certainly, earned it.

The only thing is that the HC has painted himself into a corner with Brett. It is hard to see how Brett and the HC can both save face.

rebeloke wrote:

RebelFIL wrote:This is a power struggle. Favre has been affecting, albeit indirectly and probably unintentionally, much of the Packers' personnel decisions for years. The team management is trying to establish their control, but is again finding it difficult; because when Favre speaks, people listen.

I think Favre just wants to play, and win. He knows this is the best Packers team since 1998, and he was able to sniff another Super Bowl last year. He doesn't want to sit at home and watch Rodgers win with "his" team.

Green Bay would be stupid to trade him. First, it would be a terrible for fan relations (you know the customers!). Second, he may actually be better than Rodgers and may fit with the team better (it seemed to work last year). They should just let him back on the team and allow him to compete for the starting job, fair and square. The only possible downside is that Rodgers may be upset. Oh well! I would much prefer to upset Rodgers rather than Favre, the fan base, and all the pundits who will criticize the Packers if Favre is traded.

Although I feel he is a bit self-centered, I support Favre; he has, certainly, earned it.

The only thing is that the HC has painted himself into a corner with Brett. It is hard to see how Brett and the HC can both save face.

It's not the HC but Thompson, the GM. He's being a real butt about all of this. I've been a Packer fan since 1962. This is killing me along with all the other Packer fans. Thompson justy needs to let Favre back on the team and let him start. They have a god chance at the Super Bowl with Favre. They don't with Rogers.

rebeljim wrote:

rebeloke wrote:

RebelFIL wrote:This is a power struggle. Favre has been affecting, albeit indirectly and probably unintentionally, much of the Packers' personnel decisions for years. The team management is trying to establish their control, but is again finding it difficult; because when Favre speaks, people listen.

I think Favre just wants to play, and win. He knows this is the best Packers team since 1998, and he was able to sniff another Super Bowl last year. He doesn't want to sit at home and watch Rodgers win with "his" team.

Green Bay would be stupid to trade him. First, it would be a terrible for fan relations (you know the customers!). Second, he may actually be better than Rodgers and may fit with the team better (it seemed to work last year). They should just let him back on the team and allow him to compete for the starting job, fair and square. The only possible downside is that Rodgers may be upset. Oh well! I would much prefer to upset Rodgers rather than Favre, the fan base, and all the pundits who will criticize the Packers if Favre is traded.

Although I feel he is a bit self-centered, I support Favre; he has, certainly, earned it.

The only thing is that the HC has painted himself into a corner with Brett. It is hard to see how Brett and the HC can both save face.

It's not the HC but Thompson, the GM. He's being a real butt about all of this. I've been a Packer fan since 1962. This is killing me along with all the other Packer fans. Thompson justy needs to let Favre back on the team and let him start. They have a god chance at the Super Bowl with Favre. They don't with Rogers.

Thompson is dinged if he does and if he doesn't. Farve isn't going to be around forever and they have first round money tied up in Rogers.

Balance that with Farve's propensity to not let the team know if he was going to play the last few years and Thompson is between a rock and hard place. Do you let Farve play and postpone the inevitable rebuilding at QB, of truly knowing whether Rogers can play? Do you bite the bullet now and move on or mortgage the future for one last shot? Having seen my Cowboys stay with Aikman (no problem there) without having developed their next QB was incredibly painful.

In the end, I don't care if Farve plays or not. I do think however this turns out, Thompson is done as GM in GB. It may not be this year, but it will happen.

And, if I am GM, Farve has to come in and win the job. He doesn't deserve to have the job handed to him based on his iffy past about retirement. Or, if he wants, he can have his release to go to any team not on the schedule this year and not in the division. He only gets that one because GB has the cap room to eat his salary this year and next.

parrotreb wrote:

rebeljim wrote:

rebeloke wrote: The only thing is that the HC has painted himself into a corner with Brett. It is hard to see how Brett and the HC can both save face.

It's not the HC but Thompson, the GM. He's being a real butt about all of this. I've been a Packer fan since 1962. This is killing me along with all the other Packer fans. Thompson justy needs to let Favre back on the team and let him start. They have a god chance at the Super Bowl with Favre. They don't with Rogers.

Thompson is dinged if he does and if he doesn't. Farve isn't going to be around forever and they have first round money tied up in Rogers.

Balance that with Farve's propensity to not let the team know if he was going to play the last few years and Thompson is between a rock and hard place. Do you let Farve play and postpone the inevitable rebuilding at QB, of truly knowing whether Rogers can play? Do you bite the bullet now and move on or mortgage the future for one last shot? Having seen my Cowboys stay with Aikman (no problem there) without having developed their next QB was incredibly painful.

In the end, I don't care if Farve plays or not. I do think however this turns out, Thompson is done as GM in GB. It may not be this year, but it will happen.

And, if I am GM, Farve has to come in and win the job. He doesn't deserve to have the job handed to him based on his iffy past about retirement. Or, if he wants, he can have his release to go to any team not on the schedule this year and not in the division. He only gets that one because GB has the cap room to eat his salary this year and next.

Thompson isn't even wanting to give Favre the chance to beat out Rogers, when everyone knows he can. The Pack has a great chance at the Super Bowl with Favre. With Rogers, u don't even know if you're a 500 team. If they let Favre go, I hope they lose every game this year. I've liked Thompson until this crap. Favre basically should be allowed to do what ever he wants within reason. If he needs more time to decide if he wants to play or not, so be it. When u have done what Favre has, u have earned the right.

rebeljim wrote:

parrotreb wrote:

rebeljim wrote: It's not the HC but Thompson, the GM. He's being a real butt about all of this. I've been a Packer fan since 1962. This is killing me along with all the other Packer fans. Thompson justy needs to let Favre back on the team and let him start. They have a god chance at the Super Bowl with Favre. They don't with Rogers.

Thompson is dinged if he does and if he doesn't. Farve isn't going to be around forever and they have first round money tied up in Rogers.

Balance that with Farve's propensity to not let the team know if he was going to play the last few years and Thompson is between a rock and hard place. Do you let Farve play and postpone the inevitable rebuilding at QB, of truly knowing whether Rogers can play? Do you bite the bullet now and move on or mortgage the future for one last shot? Having seen my Cowboys stay with Aikman (no problem there) without having developed their next QB was incredibly painful.

In the end, I don't care if Farve plays or not. I do think however this turns out, Thompson is done as GM in GB. It may not be this year, but it will happen.

And, if I am GM, Farve has to come in and win the job. He doesn't deserve to have the job handed to him based on his iffy past about retirement. Or, if he wants, he can have his release to go to any team not on the schedule this year and not in the division. He only gets that one because GB has the cap room to eat his salary this year and next.

Thompson isn't even wanting to give Favre the chance to beat out Rogers, when everyone knows he can. The Pack has a great chance at the Super Bowl with Favre. With Rogers, u don't even know if you're a 500 team. If they let Favre go, I hope they lose every game this year. I've liked Thompson until this crap. Favre basically should be allowed to do what ever he wants within reason. If he needs more time to decide if he wants to play or not, so be it. When u have done what Favre has, u have earned the right.

You let him hold up the team, so will everyone else. I am neither a Packers fan nor a Farve fan so I don't care. But I thought Thompson had said Farve could come back but no guarantee of a strting job, maybe he has changed his mind. Where is the coach in all of this? Quiet?

parrotreb wrote:

rebeljim wrote:

parrotreb wrote: Thompson is dinged if he does and if he doesn't. Farve isn't going to be around forever and they have first round money tied up in Rogers.

Balance that with Farve's propensity to not let the team know if he was going to play the last few years and Thompson is between a rock and hard place. Do you let Farve play and postpone the inevitable rebuilding at QB, of truly knowing whether Rogers can play? Do you bite the bullet now and move on or mortgage the future for one last shot? Having seen my Cowboys stay with Aikman (no problem there) without having developed their next QB was incredibly painful.

In the end, I don't care if Farve plays or not. I do think however this turns out, Thompson is done as GM in GB. It may not be this year, but it will happen.

And, if I am GM, Farve has to come in and win the job. He doesn't deserve to have the job handed to him based on his iffy past about retirement. Or, if he wants, he can have his release to go to any team not on the schedule this year and not in the division. He only gets that one because GB has the cap room to eat his salary this year and next.

Thompson isn't even wanting to give Favre the chance to beat out Rogers, when everyone knows he can. The Pack has a great chance at the Super Bowl with Favre. With Rogers, u don't even know if you're a 500 team. If they let Favre go, I hope they lose every game this year. I've liked Thompson until this crap. Favre basically should be allowed to do what ever he wants within reason. If he needs more time to decide if he wants to play or not, so be it. When u have done what Favre has, u have earned the right.

You let him hold up the team, so will everyone else. I am neither a Packers fan nor a Farve fan so I don't care. But I thought Thompson had said Farve could come back but no guarantee of a strting job, maybe he has changed his mind. Where is the coach in all of this? Quiet?

McCarthy is keeping mum on all of this. I as big a Packer fan as I am a Rebel fan. I go to this site http://www.jsonline.com/index/index.aspx?id=44 every day. Thompson has come out and said he won't let Favre compete for the starting job. That's total BS. Favre isn't holding up anything. Most knew he would be back this year after last season. The front office is having a major *beep* up. U are a cowboys fan. Aikman was hurt and no good his last year. Favre was second in the MVP voting and one game away from the Super Bowl last year. Anyone thinking he still hasn't got it doesn't know squat about football.

This should be in General Chat

RebelBond wrote:This should be in General Chat

Well Brett is referred to as the "Field General."