Sunday begins a new chapter in drama between QB and former team. Andrew Brandt
The saga continues Sunday at Lambeau Field. The storylines are drawn for this drama that’s been building for 16 months: The signature player for one team for a decade and a half returns in the uniform of its rival. Made for television, guaranteed to garner the strongest rating of the 2009 NFL season. High drama indeed.
Having spent nine years in Green Bay, I’ve commented often about both sides of the decision by the Packers to move on without quarterback Brett Favre. I’ll leave out the truly confidential parts of the story, but here’s a look behind the green and gold on some matters.
“We’ve moved on”
APWhen Brett Favre wanted to return to Green Bay, he was told that the organization had moved on.
As we know, when Brett decided to un-retire last year to reclaim his throne in Green Bay, coach Mike McCarthy informed him, “We’ve moved on,” signaling the end of an era. All events from that point forward were the result of those three words.
In early 2008, there was radio silence between Favre and the Packers. In previous years, McCarthy and GM Ted Thompson had stopped by the Favre compound in Mississippi for a visit when they were at the Senior Bowl in Mobile, Ala. Faced with indifference from his coach and general manager in the months following the 2008 NFC championship game, Brett took the hint. And coincidentally, on the same day Randy Moss re-signed with the Patriots after the Packers had attempted to sign him two years in a row (after much urging from their quarterback), Brett decided to retire.
Even though he cried at his press conference -- and Packer Nation cried with him -- announcing that he had “nothing left to give,” those of us who knew Brett understood this was not a decision he wanted to make (he cried following other seasons, but he wasn’t going anywhere). He was retiring from the Packers because the Packers were indifferent to his decision about playing, something he dearly wanted to continue.
The man behind the curtain
When I started with the Packers in February 1999, Ron Wolf greeted me and placed me in an office with a white-haired personnel director named Ted Thompson. I got to know Ted a bit that year. We shared an office and then worked closely for three years when he returned as general manager of the Packers. There were a few times when I was able to get Ted to open up and actually talk about things other than football players. I was pleasantly surprised to learn there was more to the person than anyone knew.
APGreen Bay GM Ted Thompson
Ted is a fundamentally good person with exceptional loyalty to a few close friends. He cares about his staff and players and about the history and tradition of the Packers. He is obsessed with the task of looking under every rock to find the best football players for the team.
Like many people, though, Ted is uncomfortable being open with people when the situation may require it. Difficult conversations are just that -- difficult -- yet necessary to clear up ambiguities. Dealing with conflict is part of leadership and management of elite athletes with fragile egos and insecurities. Avoidance is a dangerous option when handling the raw emotion of player-management relations.
I never had a difficult conversation with Ted until our last one, when it became clear we were not going to be able to continue working together. Even in that conversation, Ted acted as if he had a plane to catch. It hurt, but I agreed with him: Although I felt, and still feel, that the Packers are a national treasure, life is short. After a nine-year run through three head coaches, three general managers and countless players, it was time to move on.
It was also time for Brett to go soon after. Ted and Brett never had a cross word with each other; they just had little to no words at all. Brett was used to a certain warm response from the general manager’s office -- through the years of Ron Wolf and Mike Sherman -- and he and his family recoiled at the quiet chill from Thompson’s leadership. Rather than talking about it, both sides just stayed silent rather than face the inevitable conversation.
The successor
A major reason, of course, why the Packers moved on from Brett was Aaron Rodgers. Aaron was special from the day he arrived, exuding high intelligence, natural leadership skills and a wry sense of self and humor. We were friends despite our alma mater rivalry (Cal vs. Stanford).
APThe successor, Aaron Rodgers
Brett, as I have often said, has the Wally Pipp syndrome, knowing how he got his job -- replacing the starting quarterback and never giving it back. I saw it first as an agent for Matt Hasselbeck and then with Aaron. I understood Brett’s insecurity about a new potential team leader. Aaron was someone he could not embrace, but I was glad to finally see Brett warm to him in 2007.
On the field, Rodgers displayed in practice and preparation the skills he’s now showing as a starter. And in the 2006 and 2007 offseasons, with Brett at home making his decisions and sitting out the majority of the offseason, Aaron was preparing as if he was the starting quarterback. Ted and Mike certainly liked what they saw. Aaron was going to be fine.
The bitter end
Even upon his retirement, the Packers knew -- or should have known -- that Brett would not stay retired. They knew Brett and knew when the calendar moved closer to training camp, that he would want to play again. At the time of his retirement, as hard a conversation as it would have been, the Packers could have had an open and honest communication that they were moving on with Aaron, someone they had been grooming for three years, and any un-retirement would not be welcome. That conversation, however difficult, would have headed off the enmity to come.
Instead, there was growing distance between the parties, even with an awkward attempt to have Brett stay retired with a marketing deal with the team. Favre and the Packers retreated to their media sources to spin their stories. The Packers even uncharacteristically detailed the sequence of events that showed Brett’s vacillations, incensing Favre and his family.
Mutual mistrust ensued again with Brett’s desire to play for the Vikings and, in the view of the Packers, having extensive communication about doing so. The Packers obviously were not going to let that happen and were exasperated when the NFL dismissed tampering charges despite what they felt was strong evidence against their rival. That episode further enhanced the existing rivalry that continues Sunday.
Once set free from the Jets last winter, Brett was finally was able achieve the result he and the Vikings had pursued for more than a year. Brett now is linked at the hip to offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell, a member of Mike Sherman’s staff in Green Bay that treated Brett and his family the way felt they should be treated given his accomplishments with the team.
Handling the decision
APFavre already has a victory over the Packers this season. Can he deliver again on Sunday?
Let me say this: I agree with the decision by my former team to move to the future with Rodgers. It was not like the Packers were moving forward with a stopgap veteran quarterback. I also believe that whatever communication Brett had with the Vikings a year ago complicated matters for all sides and that Brett could have handled himself better at the end of the relationship as well.
The Packers didn’t “owe” Brett Favre anything. He had retired, was paid over $100 million by the team, and he would be a living legend free to return any time with great fanfare. At the end of the story, though, Brett deserved more from the Packers as a person, not as a player. Brett had played through personal tragedy; he had raised the profile, the profit and the asset value of the franchise; he had made the Packers a national, and international, attraction.
How could they have treated Brett better at the end? Simple, open and honest communication, and perhaps a touch of bedside manner and humanity to go along with it. As easy as it sounds, it was very hard to do but needed to be done. That may have gone a long way to making sure the parting of the most famous player on one of the most storied franchises in sports was amicable.
The next chapter – but certainly not the final one -- comes Sunday.
Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt
I think that the Packers deserved more from Brett, too. The fans certainly deserved more. It's sad to see a grown man act like a child. Just stand up and tell us what you want, what you need. Don't expect people to read your mind. It seems as if so much of this stuff, perceived indifference, imagined persecution, was all in his head. I mean, come on, TT didn't stop by on his way home from the Senior Bowl so he retired? Give me a break. He complained that they pestered him too much by asking him if he wants to come back, and he complains when they leave him alone to let him think about it. There's no making this guy happy.
Andrew,
Thank you for the post. I have stated over the past year that no matter the side you chose (Favre or Thompson), it comes down that both parties equally share responsibility for the events that unfolded and followed.
What is interesting is that Favre and Thompson have recently stated in a roundabout way that they are responsible for their actions and have moved on. And 80% of the fans realize this and have moved on; the remaining 20% will still deflect, deny, and deride as they continue to think their position is the only correct explanation. Perhaps the 20% vocal about the divorce should take the hint.
Andrew - in general, I agree with you on this topic however there is one thing that has always bugged me about this. If Brett's primary motivation was to lead a team to a championship again, as he has always claimed, what was there to even think about after the 2007 season? He was literally on the doorstep of returning to the Super Bowl on a team that made a dominant run.
I understand there are a lot of other factors involved in his decision but if I'm Mike McCarthy, it's real simple - if knocking on the door of a championship isn't enough to have you interested in playing, then I don't want you on my team. If that wasn't enough to make up his mind, then he wasn't playing for the right reasons.
Looking back at the beginning of the whole mess, I never in a MILLION years would've guessed he was retiring prior to that press conference. One game away from competing in the single greatest game in the history of sports, a game that millions of athletes can only dream of ever taking part in, a chance to literally make sports history, and you want me to beg you to come back?!?!?!?!?!?
Yes - the Packers could've handled the whole thing better than they did. But this wasn't started by "We've moved on"....
hedgeapple, I couldn't agree more. I'm glad I'm not the only one who has a big problem with a 16 year vet retiring because his team didn't beg him to return for another year. What kind of competitor needs to be wooed and begged to compete. I used to love the guy but jesus did he turn into a whiner.
Andrew, I also agree with your assesment of Ted. With the exception of a few questionable draft picks (almost every offesnive & defensive lineman he's drafted and cutting SS Smith loose in favor of Rouse) overall I think he's done a decent job. He definitely needs to improve his people skills. I always thought it was unfortunate you left the organization. I thought you did a good job. You probably won't elaborate but I'm very curious as to what that final conversation with Ted was about.
It's too bad Brett doesn't understand that his diva attitude is what cost him his job. He angered the front office with his retirement antics every year and opened a huge door for his replacement by not showing up for offseaon activities and training camps. Brett may as well have gotten injured because that was the kind of opportunity he gave Rodgers by not showing up for camp.
I think the tough part for me to accept from your assesment is that a lot of the drama could have been avoided if Ted was nicer to Brett. I'm sure you're probabaly right, but what the hell. A future hall of fame NFL veteran with an "ironman" reputation jumped off the deep end because the GM wasn't nice enough! This is was hurt Brett's feelings so much that he decided to create a media frenzy during training camp and follow through on a two year plan to play for the Packers biggest rival, and alienate half of his fans in the process. What....a freaking....girl.
"The Packers even uncharacteristically detailed the sequence of events that showed Brett’s vacillations, incensing Favre and his family."
The Packers were pretty much forced into revealing Favre's vacillations if I'm not mistaken. It was either that or let Favre win the PR battle. Thompson was explaining his version of the events and not letting Brett's accusations go unanswered.
Brandt may be unbiased, but I'm not sure he remembers exactly, all the sordid twists and turns of this unfinished saga.
Good stuff.
However, the real issue is this.... The Pack had A-rod ready to go, AND they watched Favre's performance fail at the end of the 2007 season.
The Pack knew that they had to get Rodgers on the field and see what they had before they paid him a ton of money in a contract extension.
Brett Favre is and was the face of the Pack and the NFL for a pile of years, but, look at the history of the Pack, they failed to replace Bart Starr for 2 decades.
Imagine if Favre would have come back. Rodgers would have left via free agency due to a voidable contract, Favre would have/could have retired.... Then the packers would have been left with nothing.
Think of the backlash.......
Why have I never heard in the media the sensitivities regarding Deanna in early 2008 and her role in why the Packers chose the communication path that they took at that time with Brett?
I think what a lot of Packer fans forget is that Favre and Thompson differed on what type of team this was. Thompson wanted to build through the draft and have a very young team, Favre wanted to take one or two more shots at the Super Bowl. Given they had a vertern QB, the better optiion would have been to take one more shot. With Randy Moss and another verteran G, the Packers could have won one or two more Super Bowls. I think that still bugs Favre and it should bug the fans.
I disagree that the Packers owed him more as a person. They let him waffle in the off-season and prevent them from making firm plans about the direction of the team. Despite all of the negative press Favre and his family have created for the Packers (the Greta Van Susteren interview for example) the Packers have never said anything negative about him.
If the Packers owed Favre more then Favre also owed the Packers more. Including not airing his dirty laundry in public, not talking to a rival when you ostensibly want to play for the Packers, and even being able to give either a firm decision or a firm deadline for when you will make a decision.
There is blame on both sides, but it is Favre's actions that seem to have turned this from a sad situation into the farce that it is.
I hear no mention of the fact that the Packers were in the NFC championship game in 2007, and the Jets had a better record last year than the Packers. The Vikings have a better record this year. I am a Packers fan from long before most of you were born. I attended the ICE BOWL in 67 ...and have lived through a lot of rebuilding and moving on years. They are not fun, and this old guy deserved some special treatment........All I see is comments about whiner and Diva..You must have been too young to watch the 1996 Super Bowl...I would say whiner and Diva are closer to a good description of the people commenting. TT has not put a great team on the field, or do you just ignore the win loss records?
Fascinating read Andrew, thank you for sharing.
I agree that Thompson's "avoidance" was probably unhelpful at best, and detrimental at worst. And yes, Brett deserved a bit more tenderness from an employer for whom he'd given everything he had. But even if Ted was the kindest and most emotionally understanding individual on Earth, I don't see any scenario where the Favre to Rodgers transition happens comfortably. It's a business. And Thompson seems to treat it as such, as any good GM should.
Furthermore, for as emotionally cold as Ted might've been, Brett was the opposite: telling the press his every emotion, waffling and leaving the fans and the franchise waiting year after year, talking openly about his struggle to stay dedicated, and being a poor mentor to Rodgers...let's be honest, Brett didn't do himself any favors.
"Amicable" -- I just don't think that was possible, under any scenario.
I was a Favre fan for years, and attempted to defend his legacy as one of the greatest QB's of all time despite his record in the big games of non-success. (One Super Bowl, on a team with the #1 Defense), contrasted with numerous playoff failures and INT's. The NFC Championship Game in 2007 sealed it for me. A veteran QB throwing that pass it that situation.....?
As I look back on Brett's career in GB, and the years following it, the one thing that becomes clear is that this is one of the most skilled, and most selfish players ever to play the game. Your article does nothing to refute that. Brett's always played the game his way, and, in the end, coaches and teammates be damned. I just don't see this ending well for him. Or the Vikes. And I don't wish either one of them any luck at all.
Thanx for your years in GB, Mr. Brandt.
Bottom line....are the Packers having difficulties winning games due to the QB play? No. Therefore, all the people that continue to base the Packers record since Favre left on the fact that Favre is not the QB of the Packers are laughable.
Blame TT for not putting a good team on the field, but based on the last 22 games, the decision to move on with Rodgers was the correct one.
Oh, and no one cares how long you have been a Packers fan. It doesn't bring anymore weight to your argument than Favre playing here for 16 years and expecting to be coddled and wowed and begged to come back.
1st, 2nd and 7th round picks were invested in BF replacement. And still he wanted to come back. This is a business. To us diehards, that is tough sometimes to understand. But as in good business, you take care of your investments, especially one that looked as good as ARod. Some good points made by Tiffy&Randal. But the bottom line. If BF doesn not waffle about his retirement for 3+ years, he would be on our team this week kicking MN's butt, instead of on the losing side. And that my friends, is the truth. I will clap for you in Canton in 2016(?), but I will boo your a** on Sunday. Go Pack.
Scott M. I could not agree with you more. This is what I have been telling everybody that asks me how I feel about the Brett situation. Brett quit on this team when he decided after that championship game that he had to think about coming back. WHAT THE F IS THERE TO THINK ABOUT!?!?! You were a couple plays from going to the Super Bowl, and you don't know for sure if you want come back and try again? Or was it that you needed to be begged to come back like you did the previous 4-5 years? I would have been pissed if I were his teammate, he turned his back on the team. He started this mess, and the media always wants to point to the "We're moving on" statement as causing it. No it wasn't. Farve's ego started it, and he deserves any criticism he receives for it, unfortunately most of the media is afraid to criticize him.
I am obviously a huge Packer fan and a large reason for that is because of Brett Favre, and one day I will probably even forgive him for all of this. Not now though, no way! I hope he throws 6 int's and every one of them is returned for a touchdown on Sunday. Go Pack!
Brett had plenty of special treatment.
I've been a fan for years (of the Packers). I don't hold it against Brett for wanting to play again. However, what really turned me off on Brett was that cold playoff game. Brett did not want to be there. You could tell from his actions on the sideline that he just wasn't in to playing at all it seemed.
I'd wish him well, but since he is playing for a rival, I hope he doesn't do well...
Andrew:
I have found your articles on the subject fascinating as you share your unique perspective with your readers. Today, I find myself pondering the latest article:
Was the play of Brett Favre and/or the erosion of his skills due to his age the reason why you support the move to the future and Aaron Rodgers? In other words, in your opinion, if the entire retirement issue had not occurred, and Brett planned on coming back, was it time to move to the future and trade/release Favre? (since retirement clearly was not an option --- Smile!)
I realize the vacillation did not help but does it not come down to skill set?
Would not the Packers management have known this after the NFC title game? Should not this issue have been addressed immediately and not left for either party to guess where things would end up?
Management had a template to follow of a Hall of Fame QB who was at the end of his career: Buffalo Bills and Jim Kelly. Marv Levy approached Kelly and told him he felt it was time for Jim to retire. Is it a perfect template, no but it did give management some direction.
Andrew, fantastic piece. It's nice to see someone nut up and tell the story the way it is, from an objective standpoint that places both parties in a biased light. I've been trying to ride that objective, middle ground myself, but it is awfully hard to be heard when two polarized sides are shouting at each other.
Leaving Brett with a sense of something to prove, that is dangerous.
If he was done for, then why did Green Bay put the "no Vikings" clause in the Jets trade?
Could the Jets recent tampering investigation be fallout from letting this move proceed? Could the Packers sue the Jets via arbitration?
If they did so, what kind of move could Favre and the NFLPA file? Could another Vikings item be heard in court?
Great article, Andrew!
And the elephant in the room, in this excellent review of what went down, was the fact that the the writing was on the wall that Ted Thompson wanted to create his own legacy in GB and recruited his own QB.... sending a clear message to Favre.
Is it Favre's actions that seem to have turned this from a sad situation into the farce that it is? Anyone who believes that is a fool.
He was ready to exit gracefully... and would have, had the Packers given him his walking papers. Instead, they sent Murphy down to tell him the GB Packers would never release him from his contract and would never let him play for GB... or anyone, ever again. Tthey hired a world-class PR hack to ruin his reputation.
Not until Goodell got involved, and Brett came up to face them in Green Bay, did they finally trade him to the Jets, the team that offered him the least opportunity for meaningful success.
Few argue that the Packer organization had the right to move on. Only blind, Green Bay homers believe that the way they handled the transition to their 'QB of the future' wasn't disgraceful.
Personally, I wouldn't treat my dog the way the Packers treated Favre. Because, just like Favre, my dog can bite back pretty good.
Thanks for the history lesson, Tiffy. On to the reality of now...the Jets had a better record last year...and missed the playoffs. The Vikings have a better record now...and the season is still going. You sound like a Viking fan...or else you would realize there are no trophies handed out in October/November.
Favre got all kinds of special treatment...separate room, showing up for training camp when he wanted to, yearly visits during the Senior Bowl, Chilly picking him up from the airport.
All this for a great regular season player, yet a guy who won ONE Super Bowl. He's in the same category as Jeff Hostetler, in that regard.
This seed was planted by Mike Sherman. He's doing a bang up job down at TAMU by the way, huh?
Ted and co. still can't get a break. Insert the name of any other football player in this league and tell me how the organization "failed" by not being proactive in explaining things to him in the event that he opted to un-retire. How about the concept that perhaps the Packers wished to keep their options open, as one example?
Someone show me one statement where Ted stated he wanted Brett Favre gone in favor of Aaron Rodgers. One. Show me one statement where Ted Thompson EVER said ANYTHING derogatory about Brett Favre. Ever.
Frankly, I was least impressed with the excessive amount of coddling Brett received from THIS management staff, much less the moronic (paranoid, almost?) coddling/ handling of him in the past that probably contributed more to this ridiculous fiasco than anything Ted and co. ever did (or did not) do.
I'd like to see the national media examine THAT aspect of things.
Andrew, I love ya, man, but you did some interesting speculating here, and it has a decidedly pro-Favre spin, imo. It's understandable... cripes, the whole rest of the pro-football world has been sucked into this bs vortex.
If this was any other writer, I doubt I'd be commenting. I'd just let it pass. Can you at least acknowledge that there is quite a bit of speculation in this article?
Darcy...please.
Favre had value to the Packers and other teams in the NFL...he just came off a 14-4 season and a trip to the NFC Championship. Why in the world would anyone think that they would just "let him go" without getting something in return? He was under contract for 3 more years. Again, that is laughable. Especially with the allegatinos of tampering with the Vikings...the Packers knew he was talking to them. I would venture to say that if they had just let him go to the Vikings the fallout here in GB would have been just as bad....if not worse.
TT wanted to create a Packers team for the FUTURE. Brett was not the FUTURE. They owed him nothing! Fact is Favre saw the end coming, and couldn't handle it. His inflated ego prevented that. Favre retired, they contacted him twice after this retirement to make sure he was sure of his decision....he said "yes, I'm staying retired." They moved on. What were they supposed to do, sit around until training camp with no QB in place wating for Favre to waltz back into GB. No way. Maybe in your delusional world.
Go back and watch the Greta interview where Favre spells everything out.....then come back with that garbage.
Fascinating read Andrew, thank you for sharing.
I agree that Thompson's "avoidance" was probably unhelpful at best, and detrimental at worst. And yes, Brett deserved a bit more tenderness from an employer for whom he'd given everything he had. But even if Ted was the kindest and most emotionally understanding individual on Earth, I don't see any scenario where the Favre to Rodgers transition happens comfortably. It's a business. And Thompson seems to treat it as such, as any good GM should.
Furthermore, for as emotionally cold as Ted might've been, Brett was the opposite: telling the press his every emotion, waffling and leaving the fans and the franchise waiting year after year, talking openly about his struggle to stay dedicated, and being a poor mentor to Rodgers...let's be honest, Brett didn't do himself any favors.
"Amicable" -- I just don't think that was possible, under any scenario.
Brett Favre is a great QB. I'm not going to argue that. Aaron Rodgers has a bright future. I'm not going to argue that. But, this whole situation is Brett Favre's fault. He is the one who retired. He is the one who waffles every year. It is not the GM or head coach's job to woo their QB into playing every year. And it is not wrong for an organization to want their QB to go through the offseason program and training camp like the rest of the team. Once Favre closed the door on himself, he's wanted nothing more than to stick it to the Packers and play for the Vikings. All the above things is why I don't like him anymore. That being said, I do agree with Andrew, the Packers handled the situation poorly.
Brett Favre is a great QB. I'm not going to argue that. Aaron Rodgers has a bright future. I'm not going to argue that. But, this whole situation is Brett Favre's fault. He is the one who retired. He is the one who waffles every year. It is not the GM or head coach's job to woo their QB into playing every year. And it is not wrong for an organization to want their QB to go through the offseason program and training camp like the rest of the team. Once Favre closed the door on himself, he's wanted nothing more than to stick it to the Packers and play for the Vikings. All the above things is why I don't like him anymore. That being said, I do agree with Andrew, the Packers handled the situation poorly.
To me, the legitimate criticism of the Packers front office breaks down when one considers the "un-retirement and re-retirement after the original March retirement." It seems to have been omitted in this article. Not sure why other than it might weaken the author's conclusions. Bottom line: they WERE going to accept him back AFTER his original retirement when he contacted the Packers shortly before the announcement to RE-RETIRE. This is where it all breaks down for Brett Favre's side of the story, in my humble opinion. I do agree, however, that Ted Thompson, at least according to his public image, seems to leave a bit desired as far as his communication skills. I will take Mr. Brandt's word on the personal comments made.
The part that I, along with a few other responders, seem to surprised in reading is that he didn't "feel the love," so to speak. My perception was that he did receive quite a bit of special treatment...the private locker room, excused from mini-camps and OTA's, the special parking spot next to the coach and GM. Wow. The blatant dishonesty when he has been interviewed about "sticking it to Ted" and, more recently, the booking of hotel rooms PRIOR to signing with the Vikings has been quite disappointing....all journalists should take offense to this as it is damaging to the integrity of sports reporting. Brett has been flat-out dishonest on several occasions and nobody seems to call him on it. Very disappointing indeed. I really wonder how this story would have been reported if his last name was Owens or Moss?
Have to go with Darcy's comments. I know the cheeseheads seem to all feel Brett was a prick for not stepping aside gracefully for some guy who had never played, but the rest of us see a FO that wanted to have its cake and eat it too. They didn't want him back but they didn't want him to play for anyone else. Understandable I suppose but hardly admirable or the way to treat the face of your franchise.
Andrew, I think your column was excellent. I know there has to be a temptation to settle old scores, but you gave us a balanced and fair view.
I realize the Packers might have gone out of their way to hire a PR person to help them and then lay out the sequence of how things happened but in the end were their facts correct? I haven't seen anywhere to say they were wrong. If that is the case then they gave Brett more than enough time to make his decision and come back. If he REALLY wanted to come back to play football and win a Super Bowl he would have let the emotion stay out of his decision and come back in a "more timely" fashion. He has to accept responsibility for his actions at some point.
I root against him now but I'll be a fan again when he retires...just cannot root for the man wearing purple!
Andrew
Finally the truth gets out . now we as die hard Packers fans don't have to read between the lines. Its funny how a few simple words from boss to employee could of averted or at least minimized this whole thing.We already knew how TT was a man that by saying nothing , hoped situations would disappear and he rarely ever explained a personnel move or cut and was viewed by many as sneaky,and underhanded. Thank you for pointing out that it was TT's nature to be silent on hard situations,This clears up allot that has taken place over the years.(Don't like it and its definitely not the way to conduct business) I personally view both sides as being at fault and just think its a shame that it all boils down to egos and a few words not spoken
Darcy, thinking Thompson had an agenda to establish his own legacy is just speculation and a shot at someone's character. Everything I've read is about how he's an honest, good guy, even if he's not the warmest or socially skilled (much like Andrew's article says). He didn't "recruit his own guy"--a guy who was potentially the 1st pick in the draft fell to him late in the round, a qb who could be a backup and a possible longterm replacement for a great qb who had already started wondering publicly about retirement. It's like if a couple got engaged, and the guy--a great guy--kept saying, I might or might not want to actually get married, and finally said definitively, I don't want to marry... at what point is she doing the right thing by moving on, no matter how great the guy?
To Scott M posted on Oct 30 at 2:00 p.m. - YOU HIT IT RIGHT ON THE HEAD! I love ya Andrew and respect your talent and perspective, but you sold this story short. Not only was it the waffling after the 2007 season and then the actual retirement, but the waffling that occurred deep into the off season for the 3 years (maybe more) prior to that. Enough is enough. You either want to be there and be a true part of the team and do what your job as a leader of a franchise requires, or not. He loves the game so much, remember? 4 years in a row of trying to decide whether you want to play or retire, especially after the promise of the 2007 season, THAT IS ENOUGH. The Packers had no choice but to move on for that reason alone, not to mention the fact that Aaron Rogers was doing everything they needed from a team and franchise leader on top of it. Brett left them no choice. It was not an isolated incident with him..it had become a trend. So he is at least 90% to blame in this issue and it irritates me that he does not seem to hold himself accountable for his major contribution to this whole mess, but instead feels and wants the public to feel he was somehow "wronged" in this situation. I have no respect for that. He is not a victim! What am I missing?
Leave a man with his dignity.
We've moved on? That's what you tell a 3 year player. (actually, you shouldn't even say that to a 3 year player.)
Most of those "bureaucrats" are clueless unless it can fit onto an excel spreadsheet.
I hope Brett and the Vikes stick it waaaaay up their arse.
BTW, Brett and Vikes. Give the ball to Peterson in the red zone toward the end of the game, especially after he goes all Earl Campbell on someone.
Tiffysmom, first I gotta give you props for being a die hard fan. I can't think of too many women your age (no offense at all) who are out surfing the web and blogging about your favorite football team. For that I take my hat off to you dear woman.
I have been a Packer fan for only 20 years but I definitely remember the '96 team. Brett was my football idol growing up. I'm too young to have gone through the old Packers / Bears glory days. In my opinion, the biggest rival the Packers have is the Vikings. It's a tough pill to swallow when you see your favorite player decide to retire only to come back and want to play for the team I hate the most.
I understand what you're saying about the Packers not having the greatest team the past couple years. The only way to avoid the decades of losing you experienced is to consistently add young players in the right positions at the right time. Vin-man explains above that as much as any Packer fan hated the idea, at some point it's management's job to prepare for Brett's retirement. They started that replacement process only after Brett's consistent talk about retirement every offseason. Eventually they reached a point where they realized they won't be able to hang their hat on the Favre hook much longer so they started grooming Aaron. The situation reached a point where they had an aging veteran who wasn't convinced he was able to play anymore and they were on the verge of loosing their replacement. In an attempt to avoid that QB slump they had to pull the trigger. The up side is that we have a young, promising QB that we can continue to build a team around for the next 5-6 years. The down-side is that the Packers are young in most positions and with that come growing pains. It's the nature of the beast in a sport that very much has a business side to it.
I forgot to add Rogers is a good QB.
Did you check out how many times GB's been sacked? I think it was 16 to 4.
Much of what you say the Packers admitted when Favre was traded, that the communication needed to be improved. The lack of communication between Thomposn and Favre. Thompson takes his knocks but Favre is a grown man too. If he wanted to play, why not just say so? Or say, I'll give you an answer in late May.
People getting bent out of shape that the Packers wouldn't release him so he could sign with the Vikings defies logic. In other walks of life, you don't allow an individual with specialized skills or knowledge to go without a non-compete clause and a non-disclosure agreement.
I like Mark's comments above and I agree with them.
Good luck to Brett after Sundays game. As for Sunday, I hope Capers has a game plan that will trouble Favre (ie..pressure) this time and knock him on his rear a couple of times and disrupt him often. If not then it is more of the same
Great article. Its about time we all got to hear a little behind the scenes info from a 3rd party. I am a lifetime Packers fan and a Favre fan and I agree both sides could have done more to make this less painful. Your point about TT unwillingness or inability to have a "man to man " discussion with Brett is something I have suspected all along. Ron Wolfe would have handled this much better( in my opinion anyway).
Some of the commentors on this page have accused Brett of Whining because the Management didn't "court" him into playing another year but I think it was much more than that and it didn't happen over night. TT had his guy in Rogers and wanted to build his own legacy and that didn't include Favre and I have no doubt that Favre sensed this for at least a couple of years. After all if they won another SB who would get the credit? Probably Favre.! Not enough room for two egos in Titletown.
Another point I don't quite understand is why they(Packers Management) in order to avoid a media frenzy just let Brett go to the Vikings. Afterall they obviously felt they could be successful after "moving on" without Brett. They didnt want him and we wanted to play...its a business right? I am glad to see both QB are playing well and hopefully after this game the season can get back to normal.May the best TEAM win!
I am looking forward the day when Favre enters the HOF as a Packer, presented by Holmgren and he is welcomed back to GB and treated as the warrior and the Face of the Packers as he was for 16 years.
Vince Lombardi and Brett Favre
Some final thoughts for all the people that are still mad at Brett Favre and his return to the Lambeau field.
When it comes to the Green Bay loyal we all look back at the history that makes our team so special, we have had some of the greatest players and coaches’ walk on our field, heck the Super Bowls trophy is named after one of our own. And when we think of one of the best coaches of all time, who would not mention Vince Lombardi, and this crosses all teams and sports. Lombardi's popularity was so great that Richard Nixon supposedly considered him as a running mate for the 1968 election, only to be reminded by an advisor that Lombardi was a Kennedy Democrat who had campaigned on behalf of a Wisconsin U.S. Senator (although Lombardi's wife, father and brother were Republicans).
Now who cannot forget how popular Brett Favre has been over the years, Favre is the only player to win the AP Most Valuable Player three consecutive times. He led the Packers to seven division championships (1995, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2007), four NFC Championship Games (1995, 1996, 1997, and 2007), winning two (1996 and 1997), and two Super Bowl appearances, winning one (Super Bowl XXXI). He holds many NFL records including: most career touchdown passes, most career passing yards, most career pass completions, most career pass attempts, most career interceptions thrown, most consecutive starts, and most career victories as a starting quarterback.
But there is one thing that Brett and Vince share as we write Packer history; they both retired from the packers and both came out of retirement to play with different teams. Lombardi stepped down as head coach of the Packers following the 1967 NFL season. Lombardi returned to coaching in 1969 with the Washington Redskins, where he broke a string of 14 losing seasons. The 'Skins would finish with a record of 7–5–2. He coaxed former All-Pro linebacker Sam Huff out of retirement. He even changed the team's uniform design to reflect that of the Packers, with gold and white trim along the jersey biceps, and later a gold helmet with an "R" inside a circle, similar to the famous Green Bay "G" monogram. Lombardi had brought a winning attitude to the Nation's Capital, almost like the way Brett has brought a winning attitude to the Minnesota Vikings. The only reason why Lombardi did not lead them to a Super Bowl the following years was he lost his battle with cancer.
I guess all I’m saying is Favre will take his place in Green Bay history as one of the best players to ever play the game, and even if he is coming back to Green Bay as a Viking, he does not deserve all the negativity that the press and the fans of Green Bay are giving him, I think we all need to remember this is a game, and we got to watch one of the best for 16 seasons on our field and this Sunday we get to watch him play one more time at 1265 Lombardi Ave.
favre4ever
Nobody ever said that he was washed up or couldn't play.
You don't allow Favre to walk over to your chief competition and give the the Vikings the player that they needed last year. In the same way that a company does not let a top rain making salesman or executive go with out a non compete clause. If Thompson had done that, Murphy should have fired him
I think it would be great if everyone realized:
Brett Favre = human being (and he wore it on his sleeve for 16+ years)
GB Packers + part of the NFL machine that does not care about the fan
in fact, both favre and the NFL want to take the fans money, but give the fans as little exposure to the players, coaches and the teams (overall) as possible.
Ultimately, the NFL wants to give the fans the right amount of exposure to keep sucking the money from their wallets (do you hear that sound?) and the players have no choice but to live with this the rest of their lives.
Favre should do the right thing and admit he wants to stick it to thompson and not the packers
The packers should do the right thing and open up about the truth of htis situation
and you the fans, should STOP buying hte tickets, jerseys, shoes and get ahold of yourself. What does all this get you in the end? anything? did it make your life better that you were a packer fan or bear fan? did your family love you more because the Jets won the superbowl in 1969 and YOU were a fan ? whoopty doo.
Brett Favre was a great Packer and remains a great football player. But there have been many great Packers: Starr, Hutson, White, Nitschke, Hornung, Wood, Kramer, Sharpe, Taylor, Butler, etc. I don't recall any Packer great who exhibited and cultivated the same sense of self-importance and cult of personality as Favre. The Packer legends routinely show up for games, are proud to be Packers, and understand the significance of the Packers to the State of Wisconsin. Let's face it; the Packers are one of the cultural touchstones of our State; not the Brewers, Bucks, or even Badgers (many people in Milwaukee pull for Marquette). The team is unique in Wisconsin and in the professional sports world. It is the only NFL franchise that is owned by a community. It has a stadium that was financed by the community and is used by the community. To be a Packer means to be a part of a team whose history stretches back 90 years and is an inseparable part of Green Bay and of Wisconsin. Starr gets it. Butler gets it. Favre doesn't get it.
I think that there was a time, when Holmgren was coaching, that Favre's ego was kept in check, both on and off the field. Clearly, though, once Sherman took over, he gave Favre too much leash, both on and off the field. And Brett took it and ran with it. Favre surely gave us a lot as fans: a Super Bowl win, amazing play on the field, and 16 mostly great season. But we gave him an awful lot as well. We supported him when he was addicted to painkillers. Would the press have treated him as kindly had he been in New York, Chicago, or Boston? No way. We supported him when he lost family members, including his father. And look at the massive outpouring of support when his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. Is there a Packer fan that doesn't own at least one book about Favre? We bought books authored by his mother and his wife. We bought #4 jerseys in record numbers. We named our kids after the guy. My son's bedroom wall was pasted with Favre posters. The people of Green Bay and Wisconsin, and Packer fans everywhere, embraced Favre and his family like no quarterback anywhere ever has been embraced by a community. It was an incredibly special relationship.
All that is prelude to why I think that Brandt's analysis (and those of many other pundits this week) misses the mark; in the end, for many of us fans, this was not about what Brett said or didn't say to the Packers management, or about what Ted Thompson did or didn't say to Brett and his family. It is the way that Brett treated us, as fans, in the end. I know that there are plenty of people who will say that this is professional sports, and that Brett is paid to play the game, and that he doesn't owe the fans a thing. I guess that's true in a strict sense, and it applies to 99% of the players out there. But not to this one, not to the relationship between Brett Favre and Packers fans. After saying in January 2008 how he was having so much fun and would be back next season (in 2008), he abruptly turned around and retired just two months later. Why? Brandt implies that it was because he wasn't treated with what he thought was the proper respect by Packers management; because Ted Thompson failed to bend down and kiss his ring. Or because the Packers had made the galling move of drafting a quarterback (Rodgers) that they hoped would become Favre's heir apparent. If only Brett had found the same competitive spirit in March 2008 toward Aaron Rodgers that he seems to have developed now in playing for the Vikings. If only he had said back then, "Aaron's a very promising young buck but at age 38, I'm going to show that I'm still better than him" and then dueled it out with Rodgers on the playing field, rather than being insulted by the proposition that his position at starting QB might be challenged.
If the reasons that Brandt implies caused Favre's retirement and departure from the Packers are true, then what Favre has done is dump those of us who loved him, cheered him, and supported him for 16 years, through his addiction, personal tragedy, and family loss, because he thought that he was bigger than the team and deserved better treatment than had been given to Packer greats for decades. Better treatment than Starr, better than Nitschke, better than White, better than Hornung, Taylor, or any of the others who went before him. And that wasn't just a brush-off of Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, or the Packers organization, it was a rejection of the Packer nation and everything that it represents to us, the fans. A rejection of the team, the history, the community that is built around it. And what hurts the most is that where maybe Favre at first was stunned and saddened by the turn of events in the first half of 2008, he has now become malevolent about it. The insistence on going to the Vikings. The indifferent attitude toward Packer fans and the cold statement that he's not worried about his legacy with us because true Brett Favre fans will still cheer for him and hope that he plays well against the team that he rejected.
I can only speak for myself and try to put into words what I am feeling as I anticipate his return to Lambeau. But there it is, catharsis. I will now feel free to boo Brett Favre, my hero for so many seasons. Not because of who he is or because playing for the Vikings negates all of those great times we had together in the past. No, I will boo him because I want to express to him my displeasure and disappointment with how he rejected the legion of Packer fans that supported him through thick and thin for 16 seasons; how he put his own ego above the special relationship that we had with him. And because I don't have his e-mail address, cell phone number, or a personal relationship with Peter King or Bus Cook, booing is the only way that Brett can hear me, and the collective Packer nation, express our disappointment with him and what might have been.
Why must everything revolve around Favre's family? I refer specifically to:
___________________________________________________________________________
"Brett was used to a certain warm response from the general manager’s office -- through the years of Ron Wolf and Mike Sherman -- and he and his family recoiled at the quiet chill from Thompson’s leadership."
and
"The Packers even uncharacteristically detailed the sequence of events that showed Brett’s vacillations, incensing Favre and his family."
and
"Once set free from the Jets last winter, Brett was finally was able achieve the result he and the Vikings had pursued for more than a year. Brett now is linked at the hip to offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell, a member of Mike Sherman’s staff in Green Bay that treated Brett and his family the way felt they should be treated given his accomplishments with the team."
________________________________________________________________________
There are over 1695 players in the NFL, obviously they all have families. I think I see why Favre became tiresome to the Packers management - his wife calls the shots, and she is a power-obsessed woman. Great job by the Green Bay management to move on from the constant charade. This is the NFL, not Any Given Sunday. This is real life, not a movie. The only thing that matters is the product on the field. That is paramount to anything else.
You go Tiffysmom!! It's nice to hear some frustration vented in favor of Brett's side of the story. One thing I didn't catch in the article, and something I at least remember to be true, was the team's management pressuring Favre to make a final decision on whether or not he would return prior to the 2008 draft, within 3 months of the disheartening loss in the NFC Championship game. I think this lead to a premature retirement announcement, one that Brett wasn't really ready to make. I also think the token "Sending of the Locker" to the Favre household, was a questionable gesture at best. I think he deserved better, given what he helped the Packers to accomplish during his time in Green Bay, and considering how consistently dreadful our team was before he got here.
Well said RHO1953, and great article Andrew.
Andrew-
Excellent, excellent piece! It is really great to hear your take as true Packer 'insider'.
Your analysis conveys my precise opinion (which I have been championing for the last year and and half) and it goes like this:
Favre was wrong because he SHOULD have handled it better.
Thompson was wrong because he MUST have handled it better.
Long before the Favre crisis, I have been (and remain) HIGHLY critical of Thompson's icy demeanor and secretive nature. Simply put, Thompson has the personality of a hemmorhoid. Sure, most folks wouln't really care about his leadership flaws if he was winning consistently. Not only is his record sub .500 since taking over; he also has a superb knack for alienating nearly all stakeholders: from the fans, to the media, to NFL execs (like you in particular), to ex-players, and on, and on. This represents a potentially HUGE long-term concern for the health of the organization.
Prior to the Ron Wolf era, most NFL players would've rather been sent to Siberia than to our beloved Outpost known as Green Bay. Reggie White was thought to be 'crazy' by everyone outside of Wisconsin when Wolf convinced him to come.
I remember those doom & gloom years all too well. The Green Bay Packers will always be a fragile proposition in the smallest town of all professional sports. Our organization is a going concern that outlasts Favre or Rodgers. It is vital that the 'Football leadership' do 2 things at all times:
1) Win
2) Be a classy organization that builds positive relationships
So far, Thompson has FAILED at both tasks.
When are people going to stop talking about "if the Packers had signed Randy Moss" then Favre would have been happy...
RANDY MOSS DID NOT WANT TO PLAY IN GREEN BAY!! Get over it, it was never going to happen, even if the Packers offered the same draft pick and more money than the Patriots did.
Great web site.
Why couldn't you and Thompson work together?
My one question would be, do you think the Packers would have "moved on" if the team didn't go 13-3 the year before? If the team was 6-10, I think the management would have been less in a hurry to put Rodgers out there. But at 13-3, I think Thompson and McCarthy thought the pieces were in place to move forward.
For those complaining that Brett was somehow a "crybaby" and needed to be coddled, I would say that is not the case. How would you feel if your company hired what could be your replacement, spent a lot of time grooming him, and then stopped talking to you? Would you want to work at that place anymore knowing that they basically wanted you to leave?
In the end, I still think the Packers made the right decision in moving forward. At the time, Brett was maybe going to play another year or two. I agree with Mr. Brandt in that both sides could have handled it better, but the Packers should have worked with Brett if they wanted him to go. Of course he couldn't go to the Vikings but find some place where he would be happy. The 49ers at least had that courtesy for Montana. Carmen Policy said that they did everything they could to put him on a team that would be competitive. He said they owed Montana that much.
| powered by TheSeats.com |
NFP's President was featured on...
Vikings and Dolphins probably...
Packers washout now starts for...
DeMaurice Smith lays out the stakes....
As uncapped year approaches, both...
Oct 30, 2009
01:41 PM
The Vikings and Brett Favre clearly colluded last year. There is absolutely no doubt about that. The league made a financial decision, putting their desire for the draw of Favre ahead of integrity. A finding of tampering would have put an effective end to a Favre comeback. The NFL proved itself to be a whore. There will be no justice or reckoning at this point. Favre got his way, he threw a tantrum and manipulated the fans, the league, and the Packers. It's a shame that he will never be get the spanking he deserves.