Peter King: Favre Saga Not Over

Hostile

The Duke
Messages
119,565
Reaction score
4,544
Nightmare in Green Bay: The saga of Brett Favre is far from over




t2.favre.si.jpg

Brett Favre is putting the Packers in a tough position by waffling on his decision to retire.
Heinz Kluetmeier/SI


We are early in what I can guarantee will be a very tumultuous month in the recurring Brett Favre will-he-or-won't-he saga, and what I can tell you for sure is this: No. 4 wants to play football again, and the Green Bay Packers desperately do not want him to.

Will he play? I don't know. I don't think he knows. He has, however, told coach Mike McCarthy he wants to return.

The issue is going to be pressed soon. I fully expect Favre's agent to send a letter to the Packers within the next 10 days, stating that Favre, 38, wants to be taken off the National Football League's reserve/retired list. At that point, the team will have no choice but to re-admit the league's most accomplished statistical quarterback ever back to football, and general manager Ted Thompson and McCarthy will have a decision to make that you can be sure is keeping them up nights. They can take Favre and his $12.8-million cap number back onto the team and give him his starting job back, they can trade him or they can release him.

Every one of those options makes the Packers retch. I've been told an edgy McCarthy told Favre, in their most recent phone conversation a couple of weeks ago, the legendary quarterback would put the Packers in a tough spot by reneging on his March 6 retirement. Favre understands. But I don't think it's going to stop him from doing what his body tells him to do -- play football again.

In the past few years, Favre has begun to prepare for training camp by throwing to high-school receivers at Oak Grove High School in Hattiesburg, Miss., and when he's done that in the past month, his arm has felt pain-free and strong. That, plus the fact he hasn't found anything else to do in retirement other than the chores on his 465 acres in Hattiesburg, is making him think he wants to play football again.

And one other thing: I believe as Favre looks back on his decision to retire, he thinks part of the reason he made it was he felt it would have been easier to retire and return if he changed his mind than to blindly say he was going to keep playing -- only to find out in mid-August his heart was not in it.

When he made the decision a month after the Super Bowl, he announced it with certainty. But the further he's gotten from the season, the more he realizes he still wants to play. The 2007 season was one of his three or four best as a pro. This wouldn't be a broken-down Johnny Unitas slinking back for an 18th year in San Diego. This would be Favre, in his 18th season, coming off a year when he set personal records for completion percentage (.665) and yards-per-pass-attempt (7.8).

McCarthy has also told Favre he worries about him tarnishing his legacy. The one thing I don't believe Favre understands yet is the tumult which will greet his return to the Packers, or to another NFL team. There are Packer fans who have moved on, and wish he would do the same. He doesn't realize fully -- yet -- that Brett Favre returning to the Packers would bug a slew of Packerphiles who wish he'd make a decision and stick with it and ride off into the sunset with his glory intact. Because he insulates himself from much of the football world in Mississippi, I'm sure he doesn't realize the impact that playing for another team would have on his bleed-Packer-green fandom.

Playing for any old NFL team would be crime enough to many of his faithful, but playing for a rival like Minnesota or Chicago would be like Johnny Damon spurning the Red Sox for the Yankees. Times five.

All of this scares the living tar out of McCarthy and Thompson. They've happily proceeded through the off-season preparing the 24-year-old successor to Favre, Aaron Rodgers, to take his place, and they don't want their grand plan interrupted now. It's quite understandable. Rodgers has shown promise, and the Packers have him signed through the end of the 2009 season. Can you imagine what Rodgers would think if McCarthy came to him this week and said, "I know you've been working hard getting ready to start for us, and we've promised you the starting job, but we're going to bring Brett back for one year. Or two. Or three.'' If I were Rodgers, and I'd already waited through three years without starting a game, and Favre returned, I know what I'd tell McCarthy. That's fine, Mike. But I will never sign another contract with the Packers. After 2009, whatever happens, I'm gone.

That's not the only reason why McCarthy and Thompson are scared. There are two more, actually.

One: Say they accept Favre back, then try to trade him. They're going to get, what, a third-round pick from Tampa Bay or the New York Jets or Washington for him? They'll forever be known as the men who sent the greatest Packer packing. And there's no guarantee Favre would agree to go to just any team if he chooses to come back. Don't put it past him and agent Bus Cook to refuse to report to a team Favre doesn't want to play for.

Two: Say the Packers allow Favre his freedom, which I think ultimately is what Favre wants if he doesn't get his starting job back in Green Bay.

Overwhelmingly the team that makes the most sense to sign Favre for a couple of years is Minnesota. The Vikings are training Tarvaris Jackson to be their quarterback of the future, but he's an unproven commodity with promise at best. Their offensive coordinator is Darrell Bevell, who was Favre's quarterback coach for three years, from 2003-05. They have a close relationship. Not Steve Mariucci-Favre close, but Favre has a lot of respect for him. Imagine Favre in purple. It's an absolutely vomitous scenario for the Packers, imagining Favre playing for their arch-rivals -- and imagining Favre charging out of the tunnel at Lambeau Field for the opening game of the 2008 season. Lambeau Field, Monday Night Football, the night Favre was supposed to have his number retired for the Packers.

Which is why I believe the Packers, even though they desperately want Favre to stay retired, will take him back if he presses the issue. They'll try to mollify Rodgers somehow, which I think will be difficult. Impossible, maybe.

They'll hope Favre changes his mind and goes back into retirement sometime in August ... which, if he shows up for the first day of camp, I will guarantee you he will not do. But they'll grit their teeth and smile for the cameras when he returns, all the while cursing his flip-flopness.

The smartest thing for the Packers to do right now, if Favre continues to charge ahead and insist he wants to play, would be for McCarthy and Thompson to meet with Favre in the next 10 days and try to convince him not to play. I don't think it would work, particularly because I don't sense Favre is feeling all warm and fuzzy about Packer brass right now. But Favre's an emotional sort.

One story that's never been fully told is why Favre returned in 2006, after he was convinced he'd thrown his last pass. A good part of the reason was a visit Thompson made to Hattiesburg, urging Favre to play one more year and to give then-rookie coach McCarthy a chance. The Packers, Thompson told Favre, really needed him. And on that spring day in 2006, Favre decided he'd return. If they can't convince him to stay retired, I believe they'd have a chance -- a chance -- to convince him to accept a trade, which I think would be best for all parties. Favre and Cook could list a slew of teams that would be agreeable to him, and the Packers could tell him, "We're not trading you to a team in the division.''

That seems fair. The Packers want to get on with their lives. What isn't fair to them is for Favre to be able to say he wants to pick up and go play for Minnesota or Chicago, both quarterback-needy teams.

But I don't expect that to happen. I'm told Thompson is not returning Cook's calls -- and what possible benefit would that have, other than Thompson fearing Cook would leak their conversations to favored friends in the media? -- and the Packers recently sent an intermediary to Mississippi to try to talk some sense into him. All that does is alienate Favre from the franchise further.

Final point: I keep hearing Favre was pushed into retirement by the Packers demanding an early decision this off-season, or by Thompson not showing him enough love. He might feel that way, but I think it's nonsense. Favre stood up in front of the world six weeks after he played his last game and said he was finished. If he's not, the Packers are not to blame. He is. He'll have to take the consequences for returning, either in Green Bay (where he shouldn't expect a hug from Rodgers) or elsewhere. But right now, I believe the heart is telling Favre to play, and what the heart wants, the heart usually gets.
 

bbgun

Benched
Messages
27,869
Reaction score
6
How long does a team own a retired player's rights? One year? Forever?
 

Cowboys2008

New Member
Messages
929
Reaction score
0
Get rid of Brad Johnson and Wade Wilson, and bring in Player/Coach Brett Favre.
 

Hostile

The Duke
Messages
119,565
Reaction score
4,544
bbgun;2137503 said:
How long does a team own a retired player's rights? One year? Forever?
Length of remaining contract. I also believe if a player stays away from the game contract years do not come off.
 

CoCo

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,603
Reaction score
187
I think King's take on this situation is pretty much right on the money.

Its going to be interesting to see which way this thing turns. Its pretty tough to convince a HoF'er and crowd favorite to not play when that is what he wants to do.

In the end I hope the Packers feel the freedom to do what they truly want to do without regard to public perception. No one person is bigger than the organization.
 

the kid 05

Individuals play the game, but teams beat the odds
Messages
9,543
Reaction score
3
bbgun;2137503 said:
How long does a team own a retired player's rights? One year? Forever?

I think if they retire while having lets say 4 years left on their contract and a player comes out of retirement that team has them for 4 years. That was the speculation as to why B. Sanders never came back to the NFL due to him not wanting to be on the lions.
 

the kid 05

Individuals play the game, but teams beat the odds
Messages
9,543
Reaction score
3
Hostile;2137511 said:
Length of remaining contract. I also believe if a player stays away from the game contract years do not come off.

yes i was right :D
 

TellerMorrow34

BraveHeartFan
Messages
28,358
Reaction score
5,076
Interesting situation.

I can easily see both sides and the reasons why it's best for both sides to get their way in this deal.

On one hand I totally understand how this would be terrible for Greenbay, in the long term, because even if Favre comes back it's for a year, two tops, and like King pointed out they'd be left with nothing after him cause Aaron would simply say screw this I'm out of here. And, in his defense, couldn't blame him one bit.

On the side of Favre I also totally agree with a player being able to do whatever they want when it comes to whether or not they decide not to retire. If he retired thinking he was done but now realises he's not and does want to play then I have no issue with him doing so. I do think he should be very flexible in the terms of what Greenbay might have to do with him, trade wise, in order to let that happen. If Greenbay wants to go ahead and go with Aaron, and in the long term that is certainly the smart decision, then Favre should be very willing to take a trade to go elsewhere. I wouldn't go so far as saying he should have to go to just any team, for example if they tried to stick him in Miami or something crappy like that, but for the most part he should be open to places and I'm sure there are loads of places not called Chicago or Minnesotta that would gladly take him.

As a fan of Favre I will totally admit that I'd LOVE to see him play another year. I'd be thrilled. But I'd only really want to see it in Greenbay, honestly. Now that is the fan in me. The fan in me doesn't care, in the least, if it sets Greenbay back 5 more years afterwards cause I only care about my fandom toward seeing Favre play. While I understand it would be horrible, in the long term, for the Packers, and Aaron, I couldn't care less about either of those situations as a fan. If it were up to me, and my vote counted, I'd be throwing a parade over seeing Favre throw the ball in Greenbay for one more season.

Again that's the fan in me.

But the big loser in this, either way, is Aaron. He's in the ultimate no win situation. He's already got TONS of pressure on him to replace a legend, which we've seen in the NFL plenty of times isn't in the least bit an easy task.

But now lets add into this. What if Favre does return and they trade him? Lets say they trade Favre to, say, Baltimore. They could use a vet like Favre to play a year and let the rookie groom that way. Now lets say they do that and Favre has another lights out, fantastic year, and he leads Baltimore to a division title and deep into the playoffs. While, in Greenbay, Aaron struggles, Greenbay doesn't win the division, and they have an early playoff exit.

He'll be CRUCIFIED in Greenbay. You probably is going to be anyway, if he doesn't have an outstanding year, but more so if he winds up struggling and Favre, having wanted to go ahead and play one more year, gets traded somewhere else and does great those Packer fans will turn so horribly against Aaron that it will be impossible to ever shake that, outside of winning a Superbowl of course.

I'd hate to be in Aaron's shoes. He's the one who stands to lose the most from this whole deal.
 

theebs

Believe!!!!
Messages
27,462
Reaction score
9,207
I hope this just drags out.

As long as there is the looming favre story, the cowboys story and nonsense will be on the backburner. The less time espn spends on Dallas the better.
 

speedkilz88

Well-Known Member
Messages
36,949
Reaction score
23,097
The Packers should tell him and his agent that they will trade him under one condition, it has to be to an afc team.
 

gollum

Member
Messages
747
Reaction score
0
speedkilz88;2137765 said:
The Packers should tell him and his agent that they will trade him under one condition, it has to be to an afc team.

Can you imagine this scenario...Brett wants to come back, but not to just any team. The Pack don't want him in the NFC, so they trade him to an AFC team. Some of whom I think might seem like a good fit could be the Bills, Jets, Dolphins, Ravens or Chiefs. Those are just the QB needy teams in the AFC, but some also in the NFC might be Falcons, Panthers(if Delhomme is not 100%), Bucs(Gruden can't have enough QBs), or 49ers.

What's to keep those teams from turning around and trading him to the Vikes(or Bears)? They could give the Pack say a 4th(except the Ravens who might sacrifice a 5th and 7th), then ship him to the Vikes for a 3rd. Brett could go to a contender(in division no less) and the Pack would be screwed PR wise.
 

CF74

Vet Min Plus
Messages
26,167
Reaction score
14,623
The funny thing is that ole Brett is still better than a huge majority of Qb's in the league today, I hope he goes to Minnesota:laugh2:
 

UVAwahoos

Benched
Messages
2,163
Reaction score
0
Cowboys2008;2137507 said:
Get rid of Brad Johnson and Wade Wilson, and bring in Player/Coach Brett Favre.

From what I understand, Favre selfishly took no time to tutor Rodgers and help acclimate him to the starting position, so I doubt he'd go anywhere else and suddenly begin offering some positive services.

He honestly seems quite selfish to me. It never made sense how somebody who could throw the number of INTs that he has over the years without flinching, could be praised as the "Gunslinger" and a jolly old country boy. If Romo wins a Super Bowl this year, and then comes back for the next 10 seasons continuously repeating his performance in Buffalo from last season, I am pretty sure that most Cowboys fans' heads would explode, so it's pretty amazing that 1 Super Bowl victory has kept Favre so relevant despite season after season of inconsistent play since 1996.
 

Disturbed

A Mere Flesh Wound
Messages
1,451
Reaction score
6
Doomsday;2137978 said:
I think Baltimore would be a decent fit for Favre.

Baltimore, Chicago, or Minnesota would be dangerous with Favre. I must admit I really like to watch Favre play but I am also very tired of his retirement being a story every year. And Aaron Rodgers has every reason to be frustrated, and should voice his concerns and issues. He has been very patient and has the talent to start for a lot of teams if GB is going to keep him as a backup...he should push to be traded now, not after the 2009 season. He can go somewhere and start today.
 

FloridaRob

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,460
Reaction score
1,982
If Favre submits the letter of reninstatement, there is no way that this ends well.

Favre apparently text messaged TT and TT sent him a message back that he was on vacation. Not a real good way to deal with the situation other than to put it off.

This is not going to going to end well. Favre should not listen to his heart. Your heart will lie to you. He better listen to his head....Stat Retired Brett. Or at least until ARodg gets hurt.
 

Eddie

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,092
Reaction score
5,862
If I were Aaron Rodgers, I wouldn't re-sign with the Packers either.

Getting yo-yo'd like this is not kosher.
 

aikemirv

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,405
Reaction score
9,999
FloridaRob;2138130 said:
If Favre submits the letter of reninstatement, there is no way that this ends well.

Favre apparently text messaged TT and TT sent him a message back that he was on vacation. Not a real good way to deal with the situation other than to put it off.

This is not going to going to end well. Favre should not listen to his heart. Your heart will lie to you. He better listen to his head....Stat Retired Brett. Or at least until ARodg gets hurt.


If Emmitt can go play for Arizona then Favre can go play anywhere he wants. In the end going to Arizona did nothing to hurt Emmitt's image with the Cowboys. It just made his record a bit harder to reach.

If Favre wants to play let him play. If Green Bay wants to go with Rodgers then release Favre. At the end of his career it really won't be that big of a deal....unless of course Minn were to win a SB with him - now that would hurt the Packer fans:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:
 

khiladi

Well-Known Member
Messages
36,965
Reaction score
37,487
aikemirv;2138223 said:
If Emmitt can go play for Arizona then Favre can go play anywhere he wants. In the end going to Arizona did nothing to hurt Emmitt's image with the Cowboys. It just made his record a bit harder to reach.

If Favre wants to play let him play. If Green Bay wants to go with Rodgers then release Favre. At the end of his career it really want be that big of a deal....unless of course Minn were to win a SB with him - now that would hurt the Packer fans:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

Joe Montana and San Franscisco is another case in point... Larry Allen going to the 49ers as well. Troy Aikman even considered playing elsewhere...
 
Top