I can't fathom how many people from wisconsin and chicago would gouge out their own eyes at that move. HELL NO.
What did Aaron Rogers ever do to prove he's a better player than Favre? Which one of them do you think would win more games for the Packers this season? It's not like that's a rebuilding team that needs to plan for its future.
Hard to say, but there's only one way to find out. The one game they both played in last year, Rodgers severely outperformed Favre. And while Favre had a great season last year, he was somewhere between mediocre and bad the two previous years.
Mediocre is being generous. Beyond that, for a team like the Packers that has Super Bowl talent, performance in big game, pressure situations has to go high on the list of criteria. In Favre's last three really big games -- the NFC title game, the Dallas game that you referenced, and the 2004 divisional game at Philadelphia -- he played poorly and made embarrassing throws in OT to lose each of the playoff games. Based on his legacy, the average fan assumption is that Favre gives the Packers a better chance to win the Super Bowl. But when you go beyond the name, I agree -- it's very hard to say. Given that Favre has already jilted the Packers twice and that starting Rodgers would clearly be in the team's long-term interest, I don't blame them for this.
I get trying to trade him, specifically to a team outside the division. It happens all the time in sports. But the more this drags on the more it hurts the team (in a number of ways). Personally I think they should have welcomed him back and allow him to compete for the starting job. You don't know what Rodgers can do and there's nothing wrong with a little competition. But of course Thompson isn't gonna do that. And even though you don't want to make a team in your division better, if you can't find a good suitor for him in a trade, out of respect for Favre don't you think the team should just release him so he can play. Isn't that essentially what the Spurs did regarding Scola; I'm sure they didn't want to make Houston better, but to give him a chance to play in the NBA they made the deal. (and yeah I know Scola is not the same caliber player as Favre) And if they are so dead set on Rodgers being able to lead the team back to the NFC Championship, why get so worried about him joining the Bears or the Vikings anyways? Worried that he's gonna come back and haunt you? But I though you were confident in Rodgers?
The Packers can't trade him because no one is offering. Teams can just wait and get him after he's released.
Because you make your direct competition better. I don't understand why this is so complicated. It doesn't matter if you think Favre is better than Aaron Rodgers - what matters is that he's better than Tavaris Jackson and Rex Grossman. That makes those teams better, which means those teams are more likely to beat the Packers or just plain have better records and knock them out of a wildcard race. Basketball, for what its worth, is very different because you don't care as much about your division. More teams make the playoffs and you play them all, so winning a division isn't as big an issue - so the Spurs are basically competing as much against the Lakers and Utah and Minnesota as they are the Rockets. The NFL, much like MLB, puts more of a premium on winning your division. If the Yankees have some excess talent that they can't play, they aren't just going to release the guy so he can go join the Red Sox. It's just a dumb move and unfair to your own team and your fans. That's why teams in both MLB and NFL almost never trade within their own divisions. Sure, they might owe it to Favre out of respect, but Favre screwed them over here too. So it's not like he's entirely the good guy here. They used a 1st rounder a few years ago to replace him because he was supposedly retiring. They used a 2nd rounder this year to draft another QB in case Rodgers falters because Favre said he was retiring. At some point, they have to move on - they chose now. If he didn't want that to happen, he had the choice to not retire.
How does it hurt the team, though? How are the Packers any worse off today than they were a week ago, or a month ago?
It's great fun for the media, and maybe some a bunch of questions for the coach and the GM, but does that really have any long-term impact on the team 6 weeks before the season starts? They've already made it clear that Aaron Rodgers is their starting QB.
It does have possible ramifications. Let's say Aaron Rodgers starts the year 0-3 with 2 TDs and 8 INTs. You're going to get some players that believe Favre should have been allowed to come back. I willing to bet there are multiple players on the team that want him back. I just see how it could hurt the team, maybe not like cancer but more like a mosquito bite if you will.
Certainly true - but that is going to be the case if the Packers dumped Favre last month, last week, or today. I just don't see how it's really any different if they wait to try to extract the most they can for him.
Well, I'm sure it does create a distraction for the team. Plus I think it makes them look pretty bad in the eyes of fans. But I guess they don't care too much about that cause winning cures all anyways. But again why not get the most out of your quarterback position and allow Favre to compete with Rodgers for the job...may the best man in camp win. Favre definitely isn't a saint in this whole mess. I think everybody could have predicted he would get the itch to play again....but he's not the first player to come out of retirement and not the last. Still the Packers had every right to move on...just don't think they've handled things very well, this past week. If you didn't want him in camp, then why the charade? Why offer him a spot on the team in some capacity but then fly down to Mississippi a week later to ask him not to come to camp? And why offer to pay a guy money NOT to play?
Oh absolutely - I think letting him compete with Rodgers would have been an option. My only point is that - once they decided Rodgers was their guy - there's no reason to expect Green Bay to release Favre. He's under contract with them and they he made the choice to sign that contract. So until he's a free agent, they should consider that an asset and try to maximize it's value to their team. The best way to do that is to trade him for picks. The worst way to do that is to release him to sign with Minnesota. We'll see what happens - but I suspect eventually he'll get traded somewhere, even if it just for a few crappy picks.
And in today's update, Brett Favre has some incredible analytical skills... http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3516300 It only took him 2-3 days to figure that out.
ESPN is reporting (on TV) that he has been officially reinstated and will be heading to Green Bay for practice later today.
http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/a...s-dead-favre-to-compete-for-starting-job.aspx Now Favre will get a chance to compete for the starting QB spot with Rodgers. Oh how the tide turns.
