Packers Frustrated with lack of Demand for Favre

Packers frustrated by Favre offers

Posted: Tuesday July 29, 2008 07:12AM ET

Frustration began to set in Monday at the headquarters of the Green Bay Packers with the realization that in all probability there will be no rapid resolution to their standoff with Brett Favre. The Packers have been calling all over the National Football League trying to acquire something of value for the Hall of Fame quarterback, whom they no longer want. But a source close to the trade process said the team had nothing even close to an offer it would consider. An executive in personnel for one of the teams contacted by the Packers' personnel department summed up the depressing message that Ted Thompson has been hearing. "We're not interested; he's not the right fit for us," the scout said. "I'd love to have him in another situation but we're not Brett Favre away from being really good."




---i don't want to say i told ya so...buuuutttt.....nobody wants a 38 year old has-been...not for a 1st, 2nd or 3rd anyway.

Good, he'll just have to be on the packers or just release him now.... then minnesota can pick him up and whoop are As*es

he's not going to minnesota...sorry dude, the packers would just hold him all season before they let that happen.

yea well hopefully he competes for the starting job and gets it. it's like why would you have a million dollar QB that is your best bet on the team and not start him. that's stupid

how is he the best bet? Rodgers outplayed him in the only game they both saw action. Who's to say Rodgers isn't the next great QB?

because he very well could be.

there was this guy from Tampa bay who sucked as QB for a few years then switched teams and became a hall of famer...infact, he replaced a hall of famer...it does happen.

well yeathings like that happen all the time. most QB suck until they find there mojo

i hope arron rodgers is the next franchise QB... i pray damnit :o

Mr. Reynolds wrote:well yeathings like that happen all the time. most QB suck until they find there mojo

so tell me again why you want the 38 year old burnout?

because he is our best shot to win.. you don't think so? i want to win a superbowl

Mr. Reynolds wrote:because he is our best shot to win.. you don't think so? i want to win a superbowl

favre coudln't beat the giants or cowboys...both of whom would have either a.) missed the playoffs, or b.) been a wild card in the AFC. The giants pulled that run out of their arse, kudos to them but there is no way they, or the Favre and the packers would hold up in the Varsity division (AFC).

he did beat the giants in the regular season. yea it was a slump in our season, but everyone has bad games. especially the giants game in teh playoffs. it was the gayest thing ever. favre was a one man team. he had no help from anyone. no help from grant or our defense. we rushed for what... 27 yards that game. give me a break that's pathetic.

No help from anyone? What about help from Driver tossing his man to the ground and sprinting for an 80 yard touchdown? I don't remember Favre doing anything to back the safeties off the line of scrimmage. He quit in that game, he was done before it even started, thank God Driver came to play or the Packers may have been shut out.

For what it is worth, the Packer defense did come to play, minus Al Harris. They held the Giants down for virtually the entire game.

You need to get off Favre's band wagon, he really is not the same player he was ten years ago. It's time to move on.

how would we have been shut out it was 20-23... i don't understand your logic. besides the driver td. favre also had another td... manning was **** he shouldn't have won that game. he had like a 60 rating with not td's.... it was a pathetic game by the packers.

LOL!

Manning is terrible! Yet you compare him to your HOF QB?

Reynolds you know that the Packers led in yards-after-catch, right? In a well designed offensive system with a solid head coach. The one game that Brett Favre played like the Brett Favre I remember (not counting the OT in the Giants game) was the Dallas game were he just chucked it up for anyone to catch (which usually was a Cowboy defender). If you want to win games, you want Rodgers as qb who will be solid, consistent, and stick to the gameplan.

RCBooba wrote:Reynolds you know that the Packers led in yards-after-catch, right? In a well designed offensive system with a solid head coach. The one game that Brett Favre played like the Brett Favre I remember (not counting the OT in the Giants game) was the Dallas game were he just chucked it up for anyone to catch (which usually was a Cowboy defender). If you want to win games, you want Rodgers as qb who will be solid, consistent, and stick to the gameplan.

First off, I am not ready to call McCarthy a "solid head coach", he is certainly decent but he needs to put a few more wins together before he is considered anything special.

Yards after the catch is a funny stat, sometimes the QB makes that possible, sometimes it's the receiver. In Green Bay's instance, it's both. Driver and Jennings are great with the ball in their hands and Favre gets the ball to them abnormally fast.

Look at Drago's Jets for instance, every time a receiver leaves, for a seemingly worse QB, the WR makes it to the pro bowl (Moss and Coles). Both are terrific after the catch but not with Pennington throwing ducks at them.

Then there are QB's like Garcia that always get the ball out fast and always have receivers running for 5 to 10 yards after the catch. I don't think it's coincidence the year that Galloway had in 07 with Garcia behind center.

RCBooba wrote:Reynolds you know that the Packers led in yards-after-catch, right? In a well designed offensive system with a solid head coach. The one game that Brett Favre played like the Brett Favre I remember (not counting the OT in the Giants game) was the Dallas game were he just chucked it up for anyone to catch (which usually was a Cowboy defender). If you want to win games, you want Rodgers as qb who will be solid, consistent, and stick to the gameplan.

rodgers isn't solid, consistent, or can stick to the gameplan. we don't know that at all. he's thrown what like 50 passes in his career. how can you say those 3 words without even seeing him in a game or a huge game that counts. i'll like to see him hold up in soldier field in december

Mr. Reynolds wrote:

RCBooba wrote:Reynolds you know that the Packers led in yards-after-catch, right? In a well designed offensive system with a solid head coach. The one game that Brett Favre played like the Brett Favre I remember (not counting the OT in the Giants game) was the Dallas game were he just chucked it up for anyone to catch (which usually was a Cowboy defender). If you want to win games, you want Rodgers as qb who will be solid, consistent, and stick to the gameplan.

rodgers isn't solid, consistent, or can stick to the gameplan. we don't know that at all. he's thrown what like 50 passes in his career. how can you say those 3 words without even seeing him in a game or a huge game that counts. i'll like to see him hold up in soldier field in december

lol!

I'd like to see Favre hold up in Soldier field in December! He's lost there two years in a row! lol

We don't know how good rodgers is, or how good he will be. What we do know is Favre, despite his good numbers, played **** teams and has lost every meaningfull game this decade.

I wrote this to Peter King on cnnsi to see if he would reply:

I told him that I think what could happen is that Minnesota could get in contact with a team that Green Bay would consider trading Favre to, and offer something a little better than that other team has to give up to get Favre. Than that team could trade Favre to Minnesota, and the Packers wouldn't be directly responsible for it

Is that even possible? Don't you think GB could get it contracually stipulated that he not sign with any other team than the one he is traded to?

Would be interesting to say the least. You learn that one in Monopoly or what? haha

I forget where I read it (it might actually have been in a King article) that the Packers have already stated they would form the deal so that the team that took Favre would not be allowed to shuffle him off to MN or Chicago.

RCBooba wrote:I forget where I read it (it might actually have been in a King article) that the Packers have already stated they would form the deal so that the team that took Favre would not be allowed to shuffle him off to MN or Chicago.

Ah. thanks for the clarification.

actually favre has the best record at soldier field. it's like 11-3 or something like that

most recently he coudln't even beat the TERRIBLE bears. that team is just awful and he can't beat them...no excuses for those games.

Favre has taken large dumps in most big games he has played in his career. We should have won more than 1 title with the teams we had.

that's true but we did lose to the cowboys like 5 times in the nfc championship game

Mr. Reynolds wrote:that's true but we did lose to the cowboys like 5 times in the nfc championship game

So you are further discrediting Favre? The guy cannot win the big game, even when they beat New England in the Super Bowl, they still almost came back on him. Incase you forgot, New England was not that good in 96, no way should have been close.

If it wasn't for Desmond Howard, Favre would have no rings.

you say that but he should have more rings than 1 we should have won in 97 and 07

Should have won those, too bad brett got in the way of both.

yea because rodgers could have beatin the NYG win a nfc championship game (sarcasm)

Mr. Reynolds wrote:yea because rodgers could have beatin the NYG win a nfc championship game (sarcasm)

why not? he almost got them back from a 14 point whole against the giants...and if i remember right, the giants barely beat the cowboys in dallas as well.

drago wrote:

Mr. Reynolds wrote:yea because rodgers could have beatin the NYG win a nfc championship game (sarcasm)

why not? he almost got them back from a 14 point whole against the giants...and if i remember right, the giants barely beat the cowboys in dallas as well.

a 14 point whole against the giants, don't you mean the cowboys and no he only got them 3 points.

we still lost by 10 points..

i can't wait to see how sucky rodgers does this season and then shove it in your face

even if does do shitty, it won't bother me...at least we won't have favre getting destroyed by the good teams anymore.

what?? so you would rather see rodgers get destroyed by good and shitty teams?

no...i'd rather see if he is any good than see favre play like **** when it counts.

dude you could say that about everyteam who doesn't win the superbowl. OH you didnt' play like jesus when it counts so i guess you suck.

that is what you sound like

Mr. Reynolds wrote:dude you could say that about everyteam who doesn't win the superbowl. OH you didnt' play like jesus when it counts so i guess you suck.

that is what you sound like

yeah but not every fan base gets on the QB band wagon as though he is the next coming of Jeasus Christ. It's lame, favre hasn't done squat, he blows every major game he is in...except for 12 years ago.

it's Jesus Christ B*tch!!!!

new rumor is that the Packers offered Favre 20 million dollars to stay retired.

this story is unbelievable