Did Favre Help The Lions?

Notice everyone is commenting on if...yes if if if he said it or did it...if if if...and if lips were buttholes you would be taking a crap out of your mouth....

Hey Peter...Farve 12 TDS 4 INTS...Rogers 9 TDS 4 INTS.... FARVE with Packers last year...28 TDS 15 INTS...13 WINS 3 LOSSES...ROGERS this year???? 4 WINS 3 LOSSES in 7 GAMES looks like your Pumpkin has been squashed Peter....

I could see Favre doing this. He's always been a moron off the field. True or not, this doesn't change the fact that I enjoy watching him play and always have. Rodgers is a better QB at this point, though, and all indications are that he will continue to be for years to come.

Thompson made the right move, but anybody who's heard anything Brett's said in NY can tell that he's VERY bitter about it. He doesn't open his mouth without saying something about the Packers, almost always negative. I find it annoying.

Rob, don't really know what your problem is, but if you want to post stats, at least post the correct ones... Guess you are not much into fact checking, though. Just deciding before hand whether you like a guy or not and then say well that is fact and that not. Here are the stats from this season for both Favre and Rodgers:

Favre 13 TDs, 8 INTs, 1321 yards, 92.3 rating, 68.2% compl, 10 rushes for 17 yards no TDs, 6 fumbles, 2 lost

Rodgers 12 TDs, 4 INTs, 1668 yards, 98.8 rating, 65.6% compl, 30 rushes for 113 yards with 3 TDs, 5 fumbles, 2 lost

Don't really see an advantage for Favre there...
Glazer was on a radio show this morning and said he knew about this for over a month, but had not been able to verify it until yesterday, that's when he broke it.

Yeah, that's a real apples-to-apples comparison there, Rob. The Packers have suffered a couple devastating injuries to defensive personnel this year, and their running game (hello, paging Ryan Grant) was essentially non-existent until yesterday. Why not go back to the prior two seasons, when the Packers were 8-8 (2006) and a putrid 4-12 (2005) and Favre was throwing interceptions like they were going out of style, including a ridiculous 29 in 2005. What changed for the Pack between 2006 and 2007? Favre was more efficient, but it was mostly the massive improvements in the defense and running game that led to the big jump to 13 wins.

Point is, you can't make valid comparisons between two seasons in the NFL, even between the same team. Too many variables change. Oh, and by the way, the Packers' QB is Aaron RoDgers, not Rogers.

for the record, back when the rumors started to circulate that favre wanted to come back and play, favre said that was "total BS" too. we all know what happened next.

@ Rob: At the end of the day, this story isn't about which QB is better to have this season. It's about somebody (either Favre or Thompson, but Thompson already has the upper hand) saving face after the pre-season drama.

Considering Favre's track record, it's much more likely that he is the one perpetuating this mess.

Still, I am dismayed by the use of anonymous sources as it helps verify nothing. I'd like to see a cell phone bill that itemizes calls made to Matt Millen in the week leading up to the Detroit game, this would help substantiate some of the accusations against Favre.

As I've been listening to the Jim Rome Show, all of these Packers fans (who have had their joy ripped after a dominant victory over the Colts, that sucks...) are calling and saying Brett Favre's a jackass. My response: Packer fan, I told you so. I've never liked this pile of garbage. He may have impressive stats, but Peyton Manning's are much better, and he's obtained them much swifter and he will be the GOAT, notwithstanding his trashy performance at Green Bay.

First of all, I went with the stats provided from this site..Secondly Jay Glazer verified nothing with using unnamed sources as all of the accusations have been..All he did is say he is standing by his story...What else do you expect him to do..When he gives the fans concrete sources I'll take note, but until then, i thought this was America where people need to be proven Guilty...I think i heard this during the OJ TRIAL..IF THE EVIDENCE DOESN'T FIT YOU MUST AQUIT...PS. I Don't really care how Mr. RoDgers spells his name but Thanks I'll make note of that when he does something worth remembering...

Honestly, people. Wonder how any of you would feel if every second-hand rumor someone said about you got blown up, "verified" by everyone with a bone to pick or who wants to rattle some cages, and proclaimed as true by the masses. Bring me some proof, and we'll talk. Favre has said it isn't true. What, we can't believe him because it's not as flashy?

@ Tammy: I read somewhere (maybe here?) that Glazer sat on this information for a month before he could verify it. If this is true, it's a very responsible move on his part. Still, I wish he could give us another source of verification.

At any rate, if the NFL can investigate and penalize players' actions off the field, then they can and should investigate this allegation (as I said above, but I want to re-iterate it). I can see no reason why they shouldn't

Daniel:

Re: Your statement that NFL should investigate Favre/Lions "allegation."

See http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/10/20/nfl-says-no-violation-if-favre-talked-to-lions.aspx

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello and others have said that even if the conversation occurred, no NFL rule was violated.