OT -- Are the Packers Crazy?

**highwater** · 07-31-2008, 06:04 AM

According to various media reports, the Packers' president flew to Mississippi to offer Brett Favre $20 million to NOT report to camp and stay retired.

Are they nuts? This news apparently just came out late last night, but I'm guessing the Packers shareholders/fans are not going to be especially happy with this weird offer. They actually offerred $20 million to him to do nothing? Just so Aaron Rodgers can take over? I don't understand what they are thinking.

Favre apparently turned the offer down, so this soap opera isn't over yet.

**RavenScallywag** · 07-31-2008, 08:42 AM

this is just showing signs of desperation...this tells me the Packers are afraid of making a decision on Favre once he's reinstated...If I were a Packer fan, this would worry me greatly. The fact that you want to tie up even more dead money in Favre means that if he does come back, you think whatever move you will make will turn out badly for the Packers. I think they need to just accept that he's coming back and work to find the best possible outcome for them.

Someone on a sports talk show had mentioned the idea of a "poison pill" trade, where the Packers trade Favre to a non-division rival and then say the team has to give up 3 1st rounders if they then trade him to another team.

**HoustonRaven** · 07-31-2008, 09:00 AM

The team is in a lose-lose situation now -- and its of their own doing.

I was on their side until they started all of this nonsense. It appears now Farve is going to come out of this smelling like roses. He has been saying to deaf ears what a donkey this GM has become. Now its on display for all to see.

**highwater** · 07-31-2008, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by RavenScallywag

this is just showing signs of desperation...this tells me the Packers are afraid of making a decision on Favre once he's reinstated

I agree, but I don't understand why the Packers are being so ridiculous about this. I realize that Favre's "Should I retire or shouldn't I" routine is tiresome, but why wouldn't they let him come back and at least compete for the starting QB job? He had a great season last year, so it's not like he's over the hill. It would be like Ray Lewis retiring and then changing his mind, and the Ravens saying "No thanks, we'll pay you $20 million to not come back." It's crazy.

The only thing I can think of is that Ted Thompson's first move as Packers GM was to draft Rodgers, and maybe he wants to prove that it was a great move, but if that's what's going on, it is still crazy.

**purplepoe** · 07-31-2008, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by RavenScallywag

Someone on a sports talk show had mentioned the idea of a "poison pill" trade, where the Packers trade Favre to a non-division rival and then say the team has to give up 3 1st rounders if they then trade him to another team.

I'm pretty sure there is a rule in the CBA that would prevent something like that happening.

Meaning the Packers couldn't deal him to the Jets and then the Jets turn around and deal him to the Vikings.

Not sure if it's a full season before he could be traded or what.

That $20 million deal sounds crazy but I still say Favre is a jerk for putting GB in this situation.

PP

**RavenTD** · 07-31-2008, 10:43 AM

This is like one of those ad's they keep playing every five minutes on the tv.
By the 2nd day your brain is puking bile out of your ears.

Ok, just a little different angle,who is going to throw their money on a gunslinger,with some attitude baggage,1 year maybe,yes,no,yes.no,maybe.
And the media circus to match Vick's dog fighting.

I would love to see Favre in a Vikings uniform.Just for when the Vikings and Packers match up,would certainly be great viewing.Probably the only way the Vikings can increase interest in their franchise.

**psuasskicker** · 07-31-2008, 10:45 AM

I have trouble believing the Pack actually offered to pay him 67% more to stay home than the value of his contract. There is absolutely no reason for them to offer him $1 more than his contract value to sit at home. Having him as a back-up on their roster for $12MM is ridiculously better than paying him to stay home for $20MM.

I also have trouble believing anyone to be stupid enough to turn down that sort of money to stay at home.

Media sources are all saying "a source close", "reports", and "could be as much as". To call this sketchy would probably be giving it too much credibility...

- C -

**purplepoe** · 07-31-2008, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

I have trouble believing the Pack actually offered to pay him 67% more to stay home than the value of his contract. There is absolutely no reason for them to offer him $1 more than his contract value to sit at home. Having him as a back-up on their roster for $12MM is ridiculously better than paying him to stay home for $20MM.

I also have trouble believing anyone to be stupid enough to turn down that sort of money to stay at home.

Media sources are all saying "a source close", "reports", and "could be as much as". To call this sketchy would probably be giving it too much credibility...

- C -

While on the surface it seems crazy, I see the point.

Financially it would be better to have him on the roster at 12 million but IMO the Packers think the distraction would be so enormous that it could ruin their season.

I tend to agree if that's their rationale for the offer (if it's true).

Brett Favre would not just sit and be quiet as a backup for the Packers.

PP

**psuasskicker** · 07-31-2008, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by purplepoe

While on the surface it seems crazy, I see the point.

Financially it would be better to have him on the roster at 12 million but IMO the Packers think the distraction would be so enormous that it could ruin their season.

I tend to agree if that's their rationale for the offer (if it's true).

Brett Favre would not just sit and be quiet as a backup for the Packers.

PP

I of course agree with the premise, but you don't offer to pay a guy a ton more money to sit than to be on your roster. If anything, you offer him his salary to stay away. Offering more money is stupid...who else would try to pull the same thing in hopes of getting more to sit than play?

- C -

**Jeremiah W** · 07-31-2008, 12:47 PM

They never should have told anyone outside the family what they were really thinking.

They are not going to be able to get anything in a trade when they already gave him a contract with 3 years 39 million on it, and publicly said they no longer want him. They are best off just keeping him and pretending like nothing happened.

I think it is/ was all about his contract. If he was due to make 6 mill, they would welcome him back or easily get a solid conditional pick.

**RavensInBrazil** · 07-31-2008, 01:03 PM

Brett Favre is an asshole. Granted, the Packers didn't exactly handle the situation too well, but...ah, well, I can't think of a good analogy, simply put, Favre put the Packers in a bind and this whole changing-of-mind was completely disrespectful to the team, to Aaron Rodgers and to the league. What a prima-donna scumbag

**highwater** · 07-31-2008, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

I of course agree with the premise, but you don't offer to pay a guy a ton more money to sit than to be on your roster. If anything, you offer him his salary to stay away. Offering more money is stupid

I totally agree, but if the reports are true, that is exactly what the Packers did, which is why I think the Pack FO is being obsessively stupid about this whole situation. Favre hasn't exactly looked great during this mess, but the Packers in recent days have seemed even worse. Are they really so afraid of him that they'd pay him $20 million to not play for anyone? It just doesn't make much sense. If they think they're better off with Rodgers, then cut Favre and let him do whatever he wants to do. But they can't just keep him on ice indefinitely.